What has become of the HOPE VI site in Ohio City between Lorain and Detroit?  I was so excited when I first saw the plans four years ago and I know they're still on the table, but I haven't heard much buzz about it.  As far as I'm concerned, this is one of the most exciting and most realistic development projects I've seen in recent years.

 

Any news?

 

pictures found at:

http://www.gcassoc.com/html/proj_descr.asp?pageid=1196

That is mostly CMHA stuff.  Be glad it didn't happen.  25th is doing fine right now.  There is more developement along there then I would have ever thought 10 years ago.

yes, it was (is?) a CMHA project, but it's HOPE VI and like it or not, the program has shelled out some pretty solid neighborhood planning, filling in gaps where out-of-date public housing once prevented any sort of investment.  I know the committment to 1-to-1 replacement of public units hasn't necessarily panned out completely in all of their projects nationwide, I think the overall successes have been very positive.

 

Anyone else?

Current plans are to start work in Summer.  The project has actually been scaled up (rare as that is) from 573 units to 682 units, through the addition of more for-sale housing.  I haven't seen any more recent renderings, however.  More information is here:

 

http://www.ocnw.org/

 

Edit- and I forgot to mention that they would like to try and expand the development across W. 25th to some of the parking lots near the hospital, and have them consolidate their parking in garages.  No renderings on that, either, as I don't think that it is so much of a "plan" as an "idea" right now.

I'm sorry, but when I look at West 25th St. - I see two different places.

 

North of Jay Avenue is why-bother land (all that's there is parking for Lutheran, ramshackle 2-story subsidized housing that looks like a flophouse motel and oh yeah, the teeny strip plaza). West 25th south of Jay? Probably one of the best mixed-use stretches in the state. Compare. contrast.

 

Back to the stretch north of Jay - if we have a site that's in easy walking distance of downtown and Ohio City and has some of the most fantastic views of the river and the city (see my avatar - taken from Franklin just east of West 25th) ... forgive me but do we reeeeally want to use it for subsidized housing, mixed or not? I mean, look just a little north - we have Lakeview Terrace occupying a hillside site overlooking the lake. What could and should be prime real estate is instead subsidized housing - and up until recently, it was decrepit subsidized housing (yes, I'm well aware that when it was built it was award winning - blah blah - so was Cleveland's convention center).

 

My point is that yes - if subsidized housing is demolished, it should be replaced on a 1-to-1 basis. But do we need to replace it right back on a site with potential that goes far beyond that?

I'll start by saying that I'm a little lost with some of your references since I haven't been to the site in a couple years.  And you said "see my avatar - taken from Franklin just east of West 25th," but I don't know what that refers to...

 

Ok, so there's a huge socio-political debate underlying the role of government in providing public housing and how it needs to correct for its past mistakes and what not, but that's a whole different log. 

 

I am fairly familiar with the site, though, and what was there before this project on the east side of W. 25th was some bad bad low-rise public housing.  This was a horrible use of space, indeed.  And now, with redevelopment, they're keeping (to my understanding) only the high-rise housing and rebuilding on the entire site, adding a promenade along the bluff and possibly a park leading down to the river (I can see this getting lost along the way).  The housing will be medium-density and will include commercial frontages along 25th.  If they go across the street, great!  If not, this will be a huge step on its own. 

 

I'm sure you're familiar with HOPE VI projects and objectives, but I don't know what you've seen.  The housing in Cincinnati's West End is very fetching and you'd never know what's subsidized and what's not.  Same thing in Seattle's NewHolly development and in many other examples nationwide.  I think this is government idealism attempting to prove that we can have public and private market housing side-by-side and that there doesn't need to be a stigma attached to subsidized housing. 

 

I know this is subject to a great deal more debate and I look forward to hearing what everyone has to say on the subject.

Avatar is the picture under his screenname on the left hand side of the text you and he are typing...  Its a picture of Downtown Cleveland taken from Franklin in OC...  make sense? 

gotchya!  it's a nice pic...I still can't get mine to appear!

^ If you need some avatar help, you can PM me if you'd like.

Okay, basically what I'm trying to say is that while I am all for providing for those in need (i.e. 1-to-1 housing replacement)... I think this site should be considered for something beyond what's proposed. I know about the Cabrini Green redevelopments and they seem to be working well enough. The thing is - that site was hardly the most desirable in the Chicago area.

 

Here are some photos to illustrate my point. This is a larger photo of the view that can be had from the intersection I referenced (Franklin, just east of West 25th). Mind you, this is only looking directly from this vantage point - imagine the panoramic view. The photo below it is my edited image of the West 25th rendering. The red arrow shows the vantage point so you can imagine the view from the Riverview high-rises:

 

 

 

To me, this site isn't unlike Mt. Washington in Pittsburgh (maybe that's a stretch but you get the idea). You have river views, lake views, and some of the best city views bar none, all within walking distance of one of the city's most vibrant areas. This could create a great link between Ohio City's eastern end and the Detroit-Shoreway area. It just seems like it could be so much  more - maybe mid-rises fronting the 'bluff' with low-rise fronting West 25th? Or maybe something like the warehouse apartments on West 9th - taller on the side facing the river... know what I mean?

Oh, I definitely feel you on that, but do we know if there has been any interest in the site over the past 50 years as to potential development?  It's possible that because the government owns and runs the site that alternatives were never considered, but I have to imagine that others (like us) were daydreaming about this for years! 

 

I guess the bottom line to me is that there are so many places in Cleveland that seem ideal for large-scale development, but that none of them are actually getting done.  So, when something like this comes up and it appears fairly certain that it's going to be seen through, I'm all about it!

 

Plus, here's me looking on the bright side some more...I know that the drawings are just drawings, but the development looks to have a decent level of density.  We're looking at 3-5 story buildings throughout and a couple of more significant structures on the north and south ends.  And there's the promenade, which will be great and can serve as that link to the flats and all of the development potential down there that could ultimately connect the two sides of the valley!

 

Maybe there's a private developer who can build higher density across the street on the hospital lots?  That way, there won't be a proliferation of that high-rise wall that already exists along the Ohio City bluffs.

 

Just some thoughts

^Well, Tremont had similar views of downtown and it housing prices and development exploded this past decade.  The way Ohio City has transformed itself, if there were no public housing there, it would be some of the most expensive homes in Cleveland.  In my opinion

^ yes I agree, ohio city would be extra ritzy expensive if it wasnt for the public housing there. Whats allready there is enough, and perhaps too much for that particular location. We shouldnt be using prime real estate, for people who effectively don't pay for it. People dont exactly like to live near giant "projects', and I don't want to see this giant project stall out any new investment in the area as a result. They would probably be better off selling the land to some developer, using the money raised to build projects elsewhere scattered around town, instead of concentrated in one place with prime real estate

The current project's numbers look like this:

 

- Located on the 12-acre former Riverview Public Housing Site

- 416 units of housing (phase I)

- 81 replacement public housing units (20%)

- 335 for sale units

- Predominantly (89%) 1 and 2 bedroom units

- New community facilities

- Approx. 10,000 square feet of retail on West 25th St.

- 267 surface parking spaces, 480 (or more) garage parking spaces.

- 266 dwelling units (phase II)

- 400 + garage parking spaces

- New public park/overlook on West 25th St.

 

Economic Impact

- Phase I estimated at $110 million

- 2,000 construction jobs

- Phase II estimated at $70+ million

- 650+ construction jobs

 

Affordable Housing Program

- 81 replacement public housing units serving households below 60% of area median income ($35,000). 

- 40 of those units will serve households with incomes below 30%, or $17,610.

- 35 affordable homeownership units, serving households below 80% of area median income ($42,000).

 

As far as I can tell, that's a great mix of subsidized v. market rate units and it creates nearly 700 units of housing total where only 143 sat (all subsidized) for nearly 40 years!  Plus the park and new retail and a significant chunk of funding from the feds (get it while it's still there!) and jobs to boot!  And it should be handsome...

 

The following two images are of Cincinnati's Laurel Homes development...a HOPE VI project...and are quite attractive and fairly dense by Cleveland standards.  I don't know the response to the project yet, as I was last in Cincinnati in 2000 and these weren't finished yet, but I'd be interested to hear it from those of you who are down there. 

^ That development is called City West.  Laurel Homes are the projects they ripped down.

 

There are some threads on City West...and montecarloss has some pics on his website, too:

http://www.cincyimages.com

 

Thanks for posting that MGD.  Yes, this development is Hope VI, but really, its mostly going to be market rate, AND we were able to use federal funding to help get it off the ground and ensure high design standards, something we might not get if given over to a private developer.  That seems to me a pretty good deal.  I think that this development will really reshape Ohio City, and the Cuyahoga Valley by putting that many housing units right above it.  And frankly, I think that a mix of incomes is a good thing for an urban neighborhood, and that is in jeopardy in Ohio City.

^ sparke lives in City West down here, which is also mixed income like the project you're describing.  He says so far things are going really well.

 

Outside of the project area can still be a little bit shady, but it is slowly turning the corner and there's some investment going into it--especially the nearby business district.

sorry, didn't realize they changed the name, though that makes sense...

 

glad to hear that things are going relatively well...I do remember the neighborhood around there being pretty rough and thinking about how nice it would be to reconnect downtown with Union Terminal via contiguous neighborhoods.  cursed freeway!!!

^ Well, unfortunately Union Terminal will always be separated from downtown by I-75 (as you mentioned), as well as a southbound collector (Western Ave.) and a northbound collector (Winchell Ave.).  And then between the highway and City West there are still a few blocks of low-rise projects.  So there would be a lot to do to accomplish that!

 

But enough about that...I'm polluting your thread here.  I suppose I just wanted to say that a Hope VI project can be done and done well.

Well, we're agreed then!  And as I mentioned earlier, Cleveland needs to capitalize on every last opportunity is has to use Federal $$$.  It appears that there will be less and less of it over the next...say...four years.

My understanding of the Ohio City project is that CMHA's involvement is only to catalyze the project by using federal funds and other incentives to make the project feasible for a private developer. The quid-pro-quo is that CMHA gets to subsidize the living costs for apartment residents and homeowners in a relatively small percentage of the new housing units. As far as I know, it will not be "public housing" which concentrates people with low incomes in confined areas but, rather, disperses them among others to create economic opportunities for low-income residents.

 

I very much would like to see Lutheran Hospital's large surface parking lots swept up into well-designed parking garages that look like buildings and preferably with retail along the sidewalks. I suspect the hospital wants to preserve its visibility from West 25th, so leave a gap between the parking decks to put in a loop driveway shaped like a long U to the hospital's front door with a green space in the middle of the loop.

 

I think the whole project sounds terrific, and is just what is needed to transform the north end of West 25th into the kind of area that now exists closer to Lorain Avenue.

 

KJP

Agreed!  I guess I never really thought about the west side of the street too much before I got into this discussion.  It really would pull the whole thing together.  And if it's one parking garage with a retail front, so be it!  Although, I would like to see more housing...

 

This development will pull the south end of W. 25th Street together so well with the north end and the new Superior Viaduct area, which then connects you to the East Bank via the rotating red bridge (sorry, don't know the name) and the riverside promenade, which then brings you to the Warehouse District...and on and on...lovely! 

 

Also, there's the new bike lane and promenade on the Detroit Superior Bridge...I know it's winter out, but has anyone gotten to enjoy that yet?  I haven't seen any pictures other than the original renderings.

By the way, that's part of what HOPE VI was all about...eliminating the stigma attached to public housing by interspersing it amongst market rate housing.  The idea is that they look just like the market rate housing and a passerby would never know the difference.  I think it's a great idea!  Plus, where most large-scale public housing projects of the past created secluded super blocks, HOPE VI set out to re-establish the street grid and re-open neighborhoods to pedestrian flow and commercial corridors.

"Also, there's the new bike lane and promenade on the Detroit Superior Bridge...I know it's winter out, but has anyone gotten to enjoy that yet?  I haven't seen any pictures other than the original renderings."

 

My pics from the ribbon-cutting are at the bottom of this thread:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=1091.0

 

And my pics (along with others) are at the Cleveland Public Art site:

http://www.clevelandpublicart.org/sample_images.asp?id=5

 

And that would be the Center Street (Swing) bridge  :-)

Thanks MayDay!  I love those bridges!  I guess I hadn't checked the CPA site in a while because those are all new to me.  It looks really nice!  I can't wait to get over there myself.  The last time I was in town, the whole thing was buried under a foot and a half of snow (December 23rd).

 

Tell me, though...is that a wooden boardwalk???

I just lost the post I was going to make.  I'm just going to repost the link, and not my comments, as they weren't critical.  This is a plan showing what may happen on W. 25th on the west side and at the intersection of 25th and Detroit, as well as down detroit:

 

http://www.ocnw.org/user/130/1/finalplan.pdf

Thanks for providing the link to that document! Very interesting reading/viewing.

 

Now wouldn't that area kick ass if a light rail line was returned to the lower level of the Detroit-Superior bridge, had a subway stop at West 25th, and then replaced the entrance ramps to the Shoreway-turned-boulevard for a routing down the median of the Lakefront Boulevard toward Lakewood?

 

To me, it seems such a natural, obvious addition to create the kind of the critical mass of pedestrian activity they want. Stop trying to do it with parking decks, for crying out loud. It just doesn't work as well. But sometimes I think our city's planning visionaries are either allergic to mass transit or have never ventured out of Greater Cleveland (at least with their eyes open).

 

KJP

I don't think its the planning visionaries.  The ideas are there, although not always formally proposed.  They are, like you said, natural.  But there's no money to do anything, it seems.  Or at least, not the political will to follow up on plans and get what money there is.

 

BTW, that would be a great idea.  It would service the most densely populated area in Ohio and boost the redevelopment along the Lakefront we so badly want.  In fact, they have put in small letters on the Lakefront plan a series of transit stops on the East Side for a presumed WL extension and one transit station mentioned at the intersection of Lake Road and the rail line south of the Shoreway.  Although for what that is for, I'm not sure. 

I love any idea that increases mass transit options and gives us the opportunity to develop along transit corridors.  The enticing fact about this idea is that if the Lakefront plan goes forward as proposed, there will be such significant capital improvements along the western (and eastern) Lakefront and it would be amazing to see light rail included in those plans.  Developers would jump on the projects more ardently and would build for more density...and those of us who don't want to buy a car could actually get to Edgewater or Gordon parks!

But there's no money to do anything, it seems. Or at least, not the political will to follow up on plans and get what money there is.

 

There's money. Look at the list of federal funding awarded to transit projects around the country....

 

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FY06_NS_Funding_Table_1.pdf

 

Political will? Now that's another matter.

 

BTW, that would be a great idea. It would service the most densely populated area in Ohio and boost the redevelopment along the Lakefront we so badly want. In fact, they have put in small letters on the Lakefront plan a series of transit stops on the East Side for a presumed WL extension and one transit station mentioned at the intersection of Lake Road and the rail line south of the Shoreway. Although for what that is for, I'm not sure.

 

I saw that little RTA logo, too, placed on the map where Lake Avenue goes under the railroad tracks by Don's Lighthouse. I asked a friend at RTA about it and he said it was mistakenly put there by city planners. The rest of the RTA logos were placed along the Lakefront Boulevard where bus stops could be located.

 

But, you're right. It's another wasted opportunity. Hey city planners - you're ripping up the road for a major redesign. What better time to put a rail transit line in the median?

 

KJP

I am not sure if this has been posted before, but here is a link to the Ohio City strategic plan.  It is very interesting if you have th time to read through it all.  I find it hard to believe that they could get all this done in the next three years.

 

http://www.ocnw.org/user/130/1/StrategicPlandraft-012605.pdf

Hey, at least we're in there at all for transit projects...and let's be honest...it was OUR VOTERS who vetoed light rail over and over again.  The Fed would fund throw big money at it if we passed it.  There have been so many proposals on the table since I started paying attention in the mid-90s and of course they wouldn't all happen, but it's the voters who have summarily rejected the idea...and maybe they're right.  Maybe we don't need rail and the more significant $$$ that go with it.  Maybe this BRT thing will be the perfect fit.  But when we're talking about these big infrastructure projects along the Lakefront and the Shoreway and the Innerbelt, we HAVE TO include the expansion of Light Rail as an option.  So many cities are doing it right now and why not Cleveland???

^Has RTA gone to voters with a light rail proposal recently?

The last one was for the Euclid Corridor line a few years back and it didn't pass, so they opted for the BRT, with the idea that the infrastructure would be there for conversion to light rail one day if they saw that to be necessary.  The initial proposals had the "trackless trolly" running on electricity from lines that were to run overhead and be held up by posts planted along a median and hidden in trees along the whole route.  I don't know what ever happened to this part of the design, but it seems to have gotten back to a more traditional bus design than those who conceived this plan would have imagined.  Anyways, the light rail would have cost something like twice as much, so you can imagine the public discussion over how the money could be better spent...like on stadiums on our lakefront...

There haven't been any public votes on any transit projects, rail or bus, in Cleveland or Cuyahoga County, since RTA was created in 1974. The rejection of the rail option for Euclid Corridor was by the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency. And, there never was a decision by NOACA for the NEORail commuter rail plan because there wasn't enough support for it to put up for a vote by the NOACA board.

 

I'd actually welcome a public vote on a modest project (a starter commuter rail line?) because I think the support is there. But, even that isn't needed. The funding is already out there.

 

KJP

seriously?  i could've sworn there was a public vote on the Euclid proposal...

^There was a vote in Columbus for a COTA light rail a few years ago

Seriously. In fact, I'm remembering there wasn't even a vote by NOACA's Governing Board on the Dual Hub project. RTA's board selected a rail option for the Dual Hub in 1994 or 1995, but couldn't get support from NOACA's board to seek federal funding for it (either with or without a board vote). RTA and the city had the local funding needed, so no public vote was required. In November 1995, RTA's board instead went with the busway and, a month later, NOACA's board approved seeking federal funds for it.

 

KJP

^I thought Hagan killed the dual Hub subway because of the $1billion price tag. 

Wasn't there talk of dollars spent vs. time improvement being a requirement of federal money?  I thought that is why BRT was chosen, because with all of the problems of the #6, it is still not all that bad.

 

KJP, I am not looking to stump the expert, just trying to clarify what I had thought was going on. 

Hagan was on the NOACA Governing Board at that time. I think he might have been chairman. And the facts you mentioned were reasons why Dual Hub didn't happen.

 

By the way, one of the reasons why Hagan recently ran for, and got back on the county commissioners is because he wants to shake up NOACA. He has said it has become too stagnant and needs to become a greater catalyst for regional change.

 

KJP

^Thanks  :-)

KJP, I searched and searched for info to back up my claims, but found nothing!  What I did find was this:

 

"Section 3035 of ISTEA authorized FTA to enter into a multiyear grant agreement for development of the Dual Hub Corridor, originally considered as a rail link between downtown and University Circle. In November 1995, the GCRTA Board of Trustees selected the ECIP (Euclid Corridor Improvement Project) as the locally preferred alternative (LPA) which included a busway and the rehabilitation and relocation of several existing rapid rail stations. In December 1995, the Northeast Ohio areawide coordinating agency (local metropolitan planning organization) adopted a resolution supporting the ECIP. In mid-1999, GCRTA reconfigured the scope of the ECIP to incorporate only the construction of a busway along Euclid Avenue. The rapid rail elements have been eliminated from the ECIP proposal for Section 5309 New Starts funding."

 

So, this is pretty much what you told me...It's a good thing there are fact-checkers and experts out there to set the record straight!  This kind of changes my ideas about NOACA too...maybe they do need a little shake-up! 

 

I know the price tag sounded huge, but there were several contemporary success stories to follow and our proposal, though its price tag was severely reduced, still received a "low" rating for cost effectiveness by the FTA's New Starts program in 2004.  I guess we're lucky that it's going forward at all!

Back on the subject of this project...

 

While back in Cleve-o a couple weeks ago, I took the Red-Line from W. 25th and got a pretty good view of the east side of this site from the bridge over the Cuyahoga.  I was surprised at how nice the slope looks already.  I'm sure there are improvements needed to make it an accessible city park, but there are already some nice trees and such there and the views must be amazing.  The kicker is that they might have to do some major structural work in order to support the large development at the top of the bluff, so that might knock some of this out.  That would be unfortunate, but still worth it in my eyes.  Anyways, iteresting to see with a new perspective...

My guess is that, if a large building is to placed at the edge of the hillside, CMHA (or whomever) would have to pour some deep concrete caissons, perhaps to bedrock (200+ feet down) if the building is large enough. The reason is that most hillsides above rivers in Northeast Ohio are supported by shale, which isn't very sturdy. For example, single family condos built next atop the edges of the Rocky River valley had to be placed on new caissons (I don't know how deep).

 

A condo project in Fairview Park, overlooking the valley, was among those built in this manner. And while the homes sit soundly on the caissons, their decks don't. They've been sliding bit by bit, closer to the valley. One day, Mother Nature will win, as she always does.

 

We'll see what stabilization efforts are required for the Ohio City project, but it shouldn't affect the appearance of the hillside below it. Although, as I write this, I don't know if CMHA has any plans for the hillside (ie: walking paths, terraced gardens, ski slopes, water slides, hang-gliding ramps, incline railways......).

 

KJP

ooooh!  I love inclines!  Really, though, there's nothing cutting off this bend of greenery from the river, where on the other side we've got lots of property issues.  Also, access doesn't look to be too complicated.  From what I've seen in other cities, riverfront parks can be highly successful, especially if they're connected by pedestrian and bike paths to residential areas.  In this case, that would be the West Bank of the Flats and Ohio City.  Imagine this piece connecting someday to an accessible Whiskey Island by a greenway through the West Bank.  And if the Tow Path Trail ever makes it all the way up here, whoo boy!

From what the Cuyahoga County planners say, they feel pretty good about the towpath connecting near Ohio City in the next 6 years.  Imagine if there was a nice development between 25th and the valley's edge with the tow path passing right by the front steps of some pretty townhomes.

believe me, i've imagined it...

(ie: walking paths, terraced gardens, ski slopes, water slides, hang-gliding ramps, incline railways......).

 

BTW, I hope everyone realized that list of items was intended to get more progressively more radical and unpractical as I went along. But based on MGD's response, perhaps I should have put incline railways after terraced gardens! Actually, I think terraced gardens could look pretty stunning from the Red Line, and be practical in stabilizing the hillside.

 

KJP

Aww, and I was hoping to have a water slide right into the Cuyahoga.  And then go hang-gliding.

Don't let me stop you!

 

Hey, if that daredevil can get dressed up like Spiderman and climb the exterior of skyscrapers, then any pursuit is possible....as long as getting arrested is the least dangerous outcome.