Does anyone know what is going on at the corner of Euclid and Superior Avenue where those now demolished light brick apartments used to sit? I rode past there yesterday and saw a foundation installed and was confused.

 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

Superior Avenue or Superior Road? I don't recall apartments on the Avenue side of Euclid.

Superior Rd, my mistake. The apartments were to the right of the plaza when coming from the Cleveland side of Superior.

 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Iirc, I thought more apartments were coming in there

Well that is great to hear. Hopefully they maintain a similar presence the previous apartments did. I really enjoyed those.

 

Edit: Never mind I pictured them incorrectly, that wall shouldn't had been there. Maybe it was a security thing.

 

Here's the apartment....

 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

This is the progress for what apparently is supposed to be apartments at the intersection of Euclid and Superior.

 

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

 

So I was just on the Land Bank's website and noticed that there are A LOT of parcels that are "pending transfer" in East Cleveland. And to make things more interesting, they are all on the 5 or so streets that are immediately adjacent to University Circle. (Wadena, Penrose, Woodlawn, Brightwood, etc.) Something interesting might be going down here...

So I was just on the Land Bank's website and noticed that there are A LOT of parcels that are "pending transfer" in East Cleveland. And to make things more interesting, they are all on the 5 or so streets that are immediately adjacent to University Circle. (Wadena, Penrose, Woodlawn, Brightwood, etc.) Something interesting might be going down here...

 

Link?

So I was just on the Land Bank's website and noticed that there are A LOT of parcels that are "pending transfer" in East Cleveland. And to make things more interesting, they are all on the 5 or so streets that are immediately adjacent to University Circle. (Wadena, Penrose, Woodlawn, Brightwood, etc.) Something interesting might be going down here...

 

Link?

 

 

...just Google the Land Bank site.

http://www.cuyahogalandbank.org/properties.php

New shopping center to open in East Cleveland Friday

Friday, November 18th 2016, 8:45 am EST

 

EAST CLEVELAND, OH (WOIO) - Shopping center Emerald Plaza will open in East Cleveland on Friday.

 

The new 9,000-foot center is at the corner of Euclid Ave. and Superior Ave., about one mile east of University Circle. The center's primary tenant is lifestyle apparel and footwear retailer Villa Join the Movement, who will sponsor two days of events this weekend to celebrate the opening.

 

This will be Villa's 16th store in the Cleveland area and 128th store nationwide.

 

The center will also feature a Mr. Hero restaurant, which is expected to open by Feb. of 2017.

 

Developer Inspirion Group, Ltd. says Emerald Plaza is the first retail development in East Cleveland in over 25 years.

 

MORE:

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/33743931/emerald-plaza-east-cleveland

That's the development I photographed earlier in the thread. Terribly executed.

So I was just on the Land Bank's website and noticed that there are A LOT of parcels that are "pending transfer" in East Cleveland. And to make things more interesting, they are all on the 5 or so streets that are immediately adjacent to University Circle. (Wadena, Penrose, Woodlawn, Brightwood, etc.) Something interesting might be going down here...

 

This is exciting. I wouldn't be too surprised since there's such huge potential on these few blocks for infill.

 

I really hope there is also eventually some investment in the area between Euclid and Terrace Rd. That area of Marloes, Roxford, and Rosemont has some really, really great residential streetscapes.

 

Just...just look at this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5300995,-81.580068,3a,75y,189.07h,93.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swCOB8wTO0lgop17u74SarA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5311049,-81.5792614,3a,75y,176.12h,86.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seHkxRWE10NIO3xjZAD9WNA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Truly awesome streets.

So I was just on the Land Bank's website and noticed that there are A LOT of parcels that are "pending transfer" in East Cleveland. And to make things more interesting, they are all on the 5 or so streets that are immediately adjacent to University Circle. (Wadena, Penrose, Woodlawn, Brightwood, etc.) Something interesting might be going down here...

 

This is exciting. I wouldn't be too surprised since there's such huge potential on these few blocks for infill.

 

I really hope there is also eventually some investment in the area between Euclid and Terrace Rd. That area of Marloes, Roxford, and Rosemont has some really, really great residential streetscapes.

 

Just...just look at this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5300995,-81.580068,3a,75y,189.07h,93.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swCOB8wTO0lgop17u74SarA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5311049,-81.5792614,3a,75y,176.12h,86.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seHkxRWE10NIO3xjZAD9WNA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Truly awesome streets.

 

That makes me so sad.

 

The streets between Euclid and Forest Hill Avenue have a true shot of being recovered and built back up in the next 10 years. Anything east of Superior Road is a pipe dream in my lifetime IMO.

I think the area northeast of Superior could go either way, honestly. It has some factors in it's favor. Just as the segment between Euclid and Forest Hill have their proximity to UC to make them desirable, the section between Euclid and Terrace Rd has minimal physical separation from the stable part of EC and Cleveland Heights (Rosewood Rd is under 2000 ft from the end of Brewster Rd). The invisible demarcation line between these two neighborhoods blows my mind. I think some development in the Euclid/Forest Hills section could help remove some of the EC stigma, allowing spillover into the Euclid/Terrace section.

 

Beyond that, despite the amount of abandonment in the northern section, there is also a fairly large number - by EC standards - of houses that have been maintained. There's also a few anomalous streets that appear to have escaped blight, which again, is very peculiar. There does seem to at least be a trend that the houses that remain occupied are generally maintained and cared for to some noticeable degree - some rather nicely.

 

For example:

 

This section of Chapman Ave is relatively put together - at least moreso than one would expect.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5330503,-81.5747029,3a,75y,297.8h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8IO09q_JwM4W3i9Lfh2GSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Grassmere Ave has similar sections:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5346571,-81.5756015,3a,75y,134.95h,83.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh1Tgw0UJL8DB90_HjqgssQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

You can find a decent amount of houses on each of the streets that are looking nice, so I think it's encouraging in terms of viability of a neighborhood comeback.

 

Obviously I'm optimistic because I am abnormally in love with this section of the city, but I'm hopeful.

Anything east of Superior Road is a pipe dream in my lifetime IMO.

 

East is a fascinating surviving structure of the old Warner & Swasey (Case Tech) Observatory. The houses around it look very nice quality as well.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5357165,-81.5679266,3a,75y,289.51h,88.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLYFy5j4Ik_h2_Vzqy-OTjw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I looked at an investment property on Hanover but it was land bank and it required very specific reno that I didn't personally agree with. I believe the houses on that street go for 80k+. It's so frustrating because East Cleveland has all of the bones but we can't touch it while it's East Cleveland unless you have enough money to buy and hold.

Anything east of Superior Road is a pipe dream in my lifetime IMO.

 

East is a fascinating surviving structure of the old Warner & Swasey (Case Tech) Observatory. The houses around it look very nice quality as well.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5357165,-81.5679266,3a,75y,289.51h,88.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLYFy5j4Ik_h2_Vzqy-OTjw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Agreed. That's pretty awesome. Though, it's feet away from being Cleveland Heights, so it's more understandable that the streets are a little nicer.

 

I hate being the pessimist because I used to be pretty optimistic about East Cleveland. When you look at the overall picture, there's too much to be done to see any immediate improvement in the next 5-10 years. The residents who currently live in East Cleveland and are fine with it are not going to suddenly decide to improve and maintain their properties if they have not already been. It's just very unfortunate and honestly sad.

 

This is all pretty immediate east of Superior Road-

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.539948,-81.5742209,3a,75y,156.35h,86.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUXTEaNY82prlmv8ZZlbm1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Cleveland+Heights,+OH/@41.5370961,-81.577712,3a,60y,255.56h,86.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW75wVod4KgZ_9Zp2cEhK0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8830fbb7a47c28a3:0x53a4bdeadd028c94!8m2!3d41.5200518!4d-81.556235

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5330789,-81.5801773,3a,75y,325.02h,88.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-yoBpbsw2sPXMRXN3l1u1Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

I looked at an investment property on Hanover but it was land bank and it required very specific reno that I didn't personally agree with. I believe the houses on that street go for 80k+. It's so frustrating because East Cleveland has all of the bones but we can't touch it while it's East Cleveland unless you have enough money to buy and hold.

 

Like this one! https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5362571,-81.5652097,3a,75y,83.12h,80.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOMZwvm-LvePcuX3DeH6Dsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

^Right. It stinks bc East Cleveland has POS. They obviously do not have money to enforce it though.

Hopefully East Cleveland gets it together. They have beautiful structures that are beyond repairable or are torn down. Like this apartment building on Euclid Ave.

I'm also pretty puzzled as to why certain streets are either outright abandoned while others are nearly 100% occupied. The latter tends to be streets that have been rehabbed with new asphalt, sidewalks and curbs. Targeted project?

I'm also pretty puzzled as to why certain streets are either outright abandoned while others are nearly 100% occupied. The latter tends to be streets that have been rehabbed with new asphalt, sidewalks and curbs. Targeted project?

 

Yeah, I honestly just don't get some of the occupancy trends in EC.

 

It's also weird that you get areas like Caledonia and the Brewster Rd neighborhood which stay stable, then little enclaves like Hazel and Oakhill where there's a fair amount of vacancy.

 

On the streets off of Euclid, I almost wonder if it was larger-scale slumlords leading to some streets dying at an uneven rate or just a typical chain reaction of people leaving sparked by foreclosures or concentrated poverty. Or, alternatively, if there are just streets which are fortunate enough to have enough dedicated residents that have kept them from declining. I would say, generally, every time I drive through this area I feel that it's always in far better shape than anyone would expect. The whole stretch - Roxbury, Farmington, Alvason, Idlewood, and Rosalind - are in better shape than big chunks of, say, Glenville.

 

Rosalind is in particularly good shape: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5213239,-81.5902337,3a,90y,130.93h,93.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAVQeFPSdcEQupqD54WJqCw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Idlewood, Windermere, and Knowles all seem to have had the random infrastructure development that you mentioned, which is weird because they aren't streets that appear to be as stable. Although Idlewood has some sweet houses (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5204494,-81.5905703,3a,75y,137.57h,90.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2pihe-TYTT0F_hkAUy5sQw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

 

Knowles also has this nice whimsical look. Like Edward Scissorhands but with decaying Victorians: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5281367,-81.5821333,3a,75y,136.14h,93.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssC1Rfg4jBSO1uNGFZ8NPFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Just took a quick look on Zillow. Some real surprises in this area!

 

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1873-Grasmere-Ave-East-Cleveland-OH-44112/33647833_zpid/

 

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1820-Idlewood-Ave-Cleveland-OH-44112/33646915_zpid/

 

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1876-Stanwood-Rd-Cleveland-OH-44112/33647824_zpid/

 

 

Those are some serious gems. Please EC, just get annexed already.

I hope not! With the unreasonable "demands" made by council in EC and their constant state of denial about how awful their city is managed - I'd rather not have a losing city added to Cleveland's roster. Cleveland has enough issues as it is.

^Yeah, I highly doubt that we'd actually ever see some sort of remotely smooth agreement given all the needless chest-beating and mismanagement present, but I can dream ;).

I think the list of demands has more or less died off, hasn't it?

 

The city makes sense as an additional east side neighborhood and I think at a certain point it will make sense to suck it up and swallow EC solely because of its proximity to University Circle. I realize it's a big financial burden, but if we start seeing more widespread revitalization in Glenville then it would make sense to try and stabilize EC and Forest Hills as much as possible.

 

But like the above post, I really am just dreaming about an ideal future situation.

I don't want to go too far into this because it's off topic but I will say this: it would not be good for the city of Cleveland to have a failed city on its borders. EC council dropped those dumb demands a while ago. And nobody seems to care about the people that are still there. It would be better for them to not be in a failed city either.

They really haven't dropped those demands, though. There is a very vocal group of citizens trying to oust the current mayor (for what, the 2nd time?) that will cost the city a lot of money for a special election - despite the next mayoral election being just one year away. There have been attempts (successful or not) to oust council members - all with special elections that are costly. They get in their place whiny constituents that hardly have any basis on realty or the severity of the city's situation.

Green Bridge Closes Bulk Cleveland Apartment Sale

Investment Group purchased the assets for $2.9 million. The 90-unit portfolio will undergo a renovation process, estimated to cost between $100,000 and $300,000.

by Laura Calugar | Aug 21, 2017

 

Green Bridge Real Estate completed the sale of four East Cleveland, apartment buildings located on Superior Road. Purchased in bulk, the properties traded for $2.9 million, which represents 89 percent of asking price. Green Bridge Owner Matthew King brokered the deal. Investment Group closed on the 90-unit portfolio.

 

The location on Superior Road provides all properties with easy access to Forest Hill Park and is within a 17-minute drive from downtown Cleveland.

 

The four communities are:

 

MORE:

https://www.multihousingnews.com/post/green-bridge-closes-bulk-cleveland-apartment-sale/

Beautiful buildings. Glad to see someone investing in them instead of letting them go

Arguably one of the more stable areas of East Cleveland. They were in decent shape before the purchase. The renovation - $100,000 to $300,000, I assume is per building? Otherwise that's not a renovation - it would be lipstick.

Some of those buildings are currently boarded up, no?

 

So much of the housing in that CH/EC border area, the "Superior Triangle" if you will (naming credit to Hts121), is in really bad shape. I just do not know what improvement renovating those nice old apartment buildings will really bring to the overall severely blighted surrounding neighborhood. I know I'm dreaming here, of course, but I'd like to see every structure in that area except those along Mayfield Road torn down and have Forest Hill Park extended south. That would also mean closing off every road to become parkland (including Coventry and Superior) at Mayfield Road. It would be addition by subtraction in many ways.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood.

 

My concern is the negative spillover that the blight in that neighborhood brings to the adjacent Cleveland Heights neighborhoods (Euclid Heights, Coventry Village, etc.). It's not a great situation for what could/should be some of Cleveland Heights' most stable neighborhoods. I tend to agree that, at the very least, closing off Superior would help. But I'd take it a step further and argue that dozing the whole neighborhood and making it into parkland (large-scale development there may be another option, but probably unlikely) would help the most. In fact, I was thinking about it again after posting yesterday, and I think that because Forest Hill is run by two municipalities (one of which simply does not have the resources to properly maintain it), perhaps the MetroParks would be willing to take over the East Cleveland portion or perhaps even the whole park.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood.

 

My concern is the negative spillover that the blight in that neighborhood brings to the adjacent Cleveland Heights neighborhoods (Euclid Heights, Coventry Village, etc.). It's not a great situation for what could/should be some of Cleveland Heights' most stable neighborhoods. I tend to agree that, at the very least, closing off Superior would help. But I'd take it a step further and argue that dozing the whole neighborhood and making it into parkland (large-scale development there may be another option, but probably unlikely) would help the most. In fact, I was thinking about it again after posting yesterday, and I think that because Forest Hill is run by two municipalities (one of which simply does not have the resources to properly maintain it), perhaps the MetroParks would be willing to take over the East Cleveland portion or perhaps even the whole park.

 

Considering what they have accomplished at Villa Beach, I'd say that would be the best possible scenario. 

 

How much crime is there currently in that park?  Would that be a show stopper for MetroParks?

How much crime is there currently in that park?  Would that be a show stopper for MetroParks?

 

I don't have any stats or anything, but based on anecdotes I really don't think crime is much of a problem there, at least on the CH side (which is all that I can speak to). It's a recreational hub for The City of Cleveland Heights, with baseball and softball diamonds in the park that are used on a nightly basis during summer months, and of course the Cleveland Heights Pavilion (ice rink), technically on the park property, that has tens of thousands of visitors year-round. The other part of Forest Hill Park benefits from being located within what is essentially the most stable part of East Cleveland. Remember, this is where Rockefeller made his summer home, and where the Rockefeller-inspired Forest Hill Subdivision of very attractive homes were built and still exist, going on almost a century now. The sketchier areas are to the northwest as you get closer to Euclid Avenue and of course along the southwest border where the Superior Triangle is rotting.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

 

Shaker Heights has done it for decades on the Cleveland border, it's not a racial divide but an economic one, and that's legal.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

 

Shaker Heights has done it for decades on the Cleveland border, it's not a racial divide but an economic one, and that's legal.

 

There is also that suburb of Detroit that cut off all of their side streets with the city over the course of decades. Then recently when they tried to cut off the last remaining major artery (by turning it into a permanent farmers market) people took notice. This would be different in that its entirely within EC, and the areas on both sides are largely black and poor.

 

That being said, I don't ever see it happening, as its a major commuter route, and EC would have no way to provide services to the triangle afterwards. More likely is the merger with Cleveland helping to stabilize it, or EC becoming unincorporated and CH annexing the triangle.

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

It's just one main artery that I'm suggesting would be closed off. This would be perfectly workable and part of a larger plan to expand the park to replace an area of both suburbs that is probably beyond repair. (In fact many structures in that area have already been torn down.)

 

In terms of racial segregation, CH is more than 50% minority, so no, as long as there are areas of Greater Cleveland that are close to 100% white, CH is immune from any ridiculous criticism some might try to lob in regards to segregation. I believe that Cleveland Heights has to seriously start examining novel ways in which to isolate itself from the spillover of its struggling neighbors. I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. Until we have widespread regional cooperation or consolidation, it's every suburb for itself and CH leaders need to play that game as well.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

 

Shaker Heights has done it for decades on the Cleveland border, it's not a racial divide but an economic one, and that's legal.

 

I believe Shaker justified their barriers on the basis of safety, as daily commuters used to use residential side streets to bypass busier main roads.

That being said, I don't ever see it happening, as its a major commuter route, and EC would have no way to provide services to the triangle afterwards. More likely is the merger with Cleveland helping to stabilize it, or EC becoming unincorporated and CH annexing the triangle.

 

Hopefully CH will have an opportunity to annex that area in the next decade and be able to implement some larger plan for the area. Short of that, they could just turn Superior Road (and the other five roads leading north into East Cleveland) south-southeast of the East Cleveland border into a cul-de-sac.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

 

Shaker Heights has done it for decades on the Cleveland border, it's not a racial divide but an economic one, and that's legal.

 

Of course it's a racial divide. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

^ I get the feeling that if Superior was closed off entirely going down the hill, that area would instantly become a stable, if not hot neighborhood. Sandwiched between the park and the cemetery, and adjacent to Coventry - its pretty much a perfect location in my opinion. Unfortunately its also saddled with the uncertainties of a very unstable East Cleveland. I also think this neighborhood would be one of the first to benefit from a merger of EC and Cleveland.

 

Closing off the EC/CH borders isn't workable and would likely/justifiably raise cries of racial segregation.

 

 

Shaker Heights has done it for decades on the Cleveland border, it's not a racial divide but an economic one, and that's legal.

 

Of course it's a racial device. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

 

Correlation is not causation.  It's documented that black (Shaker) residents on those streets support the barriers.

This has little if anything to do with planning / development.

Of course it's a racial divide. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

 

Sorry, but no, that's an intentionally misleading characterization when the neighborhood putting up the divide is also majority-minority.

 

The bigger picture here is that no inner-ring suburb should be criticized for instituting measures that help preserve safety and calm in the face instability in bordering communities. Particularly when thriving outer-ring suburbs have implemented barriers to access to some for decades. If Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights, Lakewood, and others want to put into place policies that help keep peace in their communities but happen to limit access to others, so be it. These communities (and others like them) have already shouldered far more than their share of the burdens that come with concentrated poverty.

Of course it's a racial divide. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

 

Sorry, but no, that's an intentionally misleading characterization when the neighborhood putting up the divide is also majority-minority.

 

The bigger picture here is that no inner-ring suburb should be criticized for instituting measures that help preserve safety and calm in the face instability in bordering communities. Particularly when thriving outer-ring suburbs have implemented barriers to access to some for decades. If Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights, Lakewood, and others want to put into place policies that help keep peace in their communities but happen to limit access to others, so be it. These communities (and others like them) have already shouldered far more than their share of the burdens that come with concentrated poverty.

 

Sorry, but yes. I'm not surprised that you post another response that shows absolutely no understanding of the issue. It's par for the course with your posts on pretty much everything.

Of course it's a racial divide. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

 

Sorry, but no, that's an intentionally misleading characterization when the neighborhood putting up the divide is also majority-minority.

 

The bigger picture here is that no inner-ring suburb should be criticized for instituting measures that help preserve safety and calm in the face instability in bordering communities. Particularly when thriving outer-ring suburbs have implemented barriers to access to some for decades. If Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights, Lakewood, and others want to put into place policies that help keep peace in their communities but happen to limit access to others, so be it. These communities (and others like them) have already shouldered far more than their share of the burdens that come with concentrated poverty.

 

Sorry, but yes. I'm not surprised that you post another response that shows absolutely no understanding of the issue. It's par for the course with your posts on pretty much everything.

 

Yup

I generally have a lot of objections to intentionally isolating neighborhoods. But, in regard to the triangle bordered by Coventry, Superior, and Mayfield, I don't agree with the initial assertion that it's even in that bad of shape. "Severely blighted" seems hyperbolic. It's overwhelmingly occupied and in pretty solid shape. I don't think many of the structures even require extensive work.

 

Street-by-street:

 

Luxor:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.517303,-81.5802797,3a,75y,196.42h,86.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skIHd5Mh9hJ72QNTo-7704Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Glenmont:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5161046,-81.579362,3a,75y,5.38h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1somdUMWvQSrHdTSbMzwsTRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Belmar, which is probably in the roughest shape:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5169943,-81.5781215,3a,75y,186.43h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shB7n5pcCt31FUfhjBucKfg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Eddington:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5167051,-81.5769357,3a,60y,187.13h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slWyIsUEgW4nxP933Y8kpIg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Hillcrest:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5162402,-81.5758299,3a,75y,190.84h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slmi_eeHddk4m0LSH1OJq4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

StreetView is two years old, but I drove down Belmar and Eddington two weeks ago and still remarked that it looked pretty alright.

 

If Glynn Rd, Brewster Rd, and all of those other areas of EC are doing fine (or as well as they can with EC services) then there's no reason that the above streets need to be isolated in order to "save them." Stabilizing and filling the apartments along Superior could really be the catalytic investment that this neighborhood needs.

I generally have a lot of objections to intentionally isolating neighborhoods. But, in regard to the triangle bordered by Coventry, Superior, and Mayfield, I don't agree with the initial assertion that it's even in that bad of shape. "Severely blighted" seems hyperbolic. It's overwhelmingly occupied and in pretty solid shape. I don't think many of the structures even require extensive work.

 

Street-by-street:

 

Luxor:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.517303,-81.5802797,3a,75y,196.42h,86.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skIHd5Mh9hJ72QNTo-7704Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Glenmont:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5161046,-81.579362,3a,75y,5.38h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1somdUMWvQSrHdTSbMzwsTRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Belmar, which is probably in the roughest shape:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5169943,-81.5781215,3a,75y,186.43h,86.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shB7n5pcCt31FUfhjBucKfg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Eddington:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5167051,-81.5769357,3a,60y,187.13h,87.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slWyIsUEgW4nxP933Y8kpIg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Hillcrest:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5162402,-81.5758299,3a,75y,190.84h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slmi_eeHddk4m0LSH1OJq4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

StreetView is two years old, but I drove down Belmar and Eddington two weeks ago and still remarked that it looked pretty alright.

 

If Glynn Rd, Brewster Rd, and all of those other areas of EC are doing fine (or as well as they can with EC services) then there's no reason that the above streets need to be isolated in order to "save them." Stabilizing and filling the apartments along Superior could really be the catalytic investment that this neighborhood needs.

 

I tend to agree. I would say that they may be at risk of becoming blighted in the future, like 10 years or so if East Cleveland continues on its current pace of disorder.

I was checking the landbank website and noticed that brightwood (avenue?) had about 15-20 properties "Pending transfer", anyone have insight?

Of course it's a racial divide. Economic divides are very frequently also racial divides. To say they are not is dishonest.

 

Sorry, but no, that's an intentionally misleading characterization when the neighborhood putting up the divide is also majority-minority.

 

The bigger picture here is that no inner-ring suburb should be criticized for instituting measures that help preserve safety and calm in the face instability in bordering communities. Particularly when thriving outer-ring suburbs have implemented barriers to access to some for decades. If Cleveland Heights, Shaker Heights, Lakewood, and others want to put into place policies that help keep peace in their communities but happen to limit access to others, so be it. These communities (and others like them) have already shouldered far more than their share of the burdens that come with concentrated poverty.

 

Sorry, but yes. I'm not surprised that you post another response that shows absolutely no understanding of the issue. It's par for the course with your posts on pretty much everything.

 

I understand the issue very clearly. Poverty and crime have been spreading into Cleveland Heights from Cleveland and East Cleveland for at least three decades now. There is absolutely no reason why the city should sit back and allow it to continue. At some point, the burden will become too great, and the consequences for even the more stable parts of the suburb will be dire.