Hi Guys - Hingetown is an awesome place. Apparently some people hate the name and some people love it. But that's normal right. Nobody is ever going to come up with anything that everyone likes (I am pretty sure the person who invented pre-sliced bread had their haters!). And yes, a developer came up with the idea, but who really cares?  I personally think it's a cool name. And the fact that the PD is using it means it's catching on.

 

Here's why it's called Hingetown .....

 

"Hingetown is a part of Ohio City in Cleveland, and is at the hinge of Gordon Square Arts District, the Market District, and the Warehouse District".

Well I thought I would email the contact but there appears to be none.

 

Nice website there buddy.

 

http://hingetown.com/

 

 

Well I thought I would email the contact but there appears to be none.

 

Nice website there buddy.

 

http://hingetown.com/

 

 

I sometimes wonder if websites are passe anymore. Try their facebook page

https://www.facebook.com/Hingetown

 

What does this tell me about this "owner created" district? Not a damn thing!  Only that someone came up with a name and hash tag

 

I think these are fair and reasonable questions.

[*]What is Hingetown?

[*]Why the name "Hingetown"?

[*]What relation does "Hingetown" have to the greater Ohio City neighborhood?

[*]Who are the stake holders?  (Do the city, CDC, Real Estate developers, business owners and residents, etc. agree this area should be named as such?)

[*]What are the exact borders of "Hingetown"?

Can those be answered by reading the website you provided or Facebook?

 

As a PR/Communications/Marketing person, I'm all for branding, but has this moniker been executed properly?  I'm all for thinking outside the box, but where can anyone find any concrete information about Hingetown?  I say this because the Freshwater Cleveland blog post was more informative than the "Hingetown" website and Facebook Page.

Why does anyone owe you or anyone else any explanation or provide you with any documentation? if someone wants to buy a lot of property, invest a hell of a lot of money, open what seems to be new thriving businesses in an area that needed it, and they want to call that area Hingetown they have that right. If people like it and it catches on as a sub neighborhood of Ohio City then all the better. Having to check in with everyone and make sure they are ok with it are ridiculous. If you don't like it don't hang there.

Couldn't agree more ClevelandBrowns.  Hingetown has evolved out of a developers vision and the hard work of the neighborhood stakeholders.  Every media outlet in Cleveland has used the name in print and broadcast so it has established itself within an amazingly short period of time ( less than 24 months).  It has gone from a sketchy area to the one of the coolest areas of the city with shops restaurants and galleries.  There are weekly outdoor concert series and monthly outdoor markets - both of which are packed with people.  And to think all this has happened without a "Media Package" - truly amazing.

And with that, MyTwoSense - you are welcome (and by welcome, I mean that I strongly suggest) to follow surfohio's suggestion and use the contact info provided.

Another great step forward for Hingetown. Exciting stuff!

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/07/spaces_reveals_design_for_prop.html

And if anyone is interested in checking out the Hingetown thread, here it is .....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=29231.0

 

Also, for some historical background, not all Cleveland neighborhoods were named according to some strict methodology. Take Duck Island as an example. Anyone who has ever been there can tell you that not only is it not an island, but there aren't any ducks there either. Apparently it acquired a nickname a long time ago and it has stuck ever since. There's actually a thread about this ...

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=23585.0

 

And let's not forget the Flats. Which, for a while in the 1830's, was called Willeyville. Apparently our first mayor (John Willey) liked to hang out there a lot (lucky for him TMZ didn't exist back then) and dubbed it himself. Nobody is aware of him asking anyone's permission.

Looks awesome.  Hopefully they can dress up the SW corner of that building, too, which faces the intersection of West 29th and Church- arguably the center of Hingetown.

Thank you, let's get back to actual developments. Folks, when an Admin/Mod makes a request to discontinue off-topic posts, please have the courtesy to comply.

More news on Lorain...This street is gaining some serious momentum!

 

bloom & clover wax studio extends lorain ave's westward retail march

 

Some might say that the opening of a waxing studio in the former home of the Speak in Tongues music club signals a seismic shift in the Ohio City neighborhood it calls home. To owner Danielle Fuller, it simply fills a need for those looking to get pretty.

 

On Tuesday, July 8, Fuller opened the doors to Bloom & Clover Wax Studio at 4309 Lorain Avenue, the former home of the infamous rock club Speak in Tongues, which closed in 2001. It has remained vacant ever since.

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/devnews/bloomandclover070814.aspx

^ SPeaking of serious momentum on Lorain...I stopped by Platform Brewing for a quick peek on my way home from work Friday.  Very very cool. A fine addition to the hood. I'm in constant amazement that so much classic architecture has remained standing along the entire street. I dare say it reminds me a little of pics of Cincy.

 

http://www.ohio.com/blogs/the-beer-blog/the-beer-blog-1.273124/platform-beer-ready-for-cleveland-debut-1.501408

West 25th doesn't want to be left out......

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=8513.0

RIP SIT!

 

Well thats great news the area continues to pick up momentum. 

 

When is Lorain getting resurfaced and how far West is that initiative going?

Because the project aspirations have flip flopped so much, I don't know exactly what they are doing, but the Franklin Castle has been receiving SERIOUS attention lately. I've seen people there the last 5 times I've biked by and yesterday there were new windows put in and some outside work.

Vintage Development Group plans Ohio City apartment project as new construction heats up

By Michelle Jarboe McFee, The Plain Dealer

on July 28, 2014 at 7:00 AM, updated July 28, 2014 at 7:06 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- New apartment construction is spreading west on Detroit Avenue in Cleveland's Ohio City neighborhood, where Vintage Development Group plans to replace a shuttered bathhouse with a 60- to 75-unit residential building.

 

The development is part of a burgeoning wave of investment along one of the West Side's key corridors. Just east of the Vintage site, the new Mariner's Watch apartments are set to open in October or November. Small retailers have repopulated a nearby stretch now known as Hingetown. And a recent rezoning indicates that more mixed-use projects could be brewing.

 

Real estate records show that a Vintage affiliate paid $275,000 for the Club Cleveland property, at 3219 Detroit Ave., in October. Chip Marous, Vintage's managing member, confirmed last week that he aims to start construction in the spring, with hopes of opening the first apartments in fall 2015 and the rest in 2016.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/07/vintage_development_group_plan.html#incart_river

Man, I'm so excited for Detroit Avenue.  6 stories with ground-floor retail?  Can we just hit copy and paste all the way down to about W. 54th?

 

No go to W. 57th!  : )

Man, I'm so excited for Detroit Avenue.  6 stories with ground-floor retail?  Can we just hit copy and paste all the way down to about W. 54th?

 

 

You may not be far off. There is a very large, publicly owned property on Detroit Avenue that's going to hit the market very soon and developers are foaming at the mouth over it. There is a slight hitch with it, but I think the odds are pretty good it will get redeveloped with housing.

^Max Hays I'm guessing?

I doubt it's the school across from Burger King/Lake.

 

:-)

 

Man, cant wait for that Max Hayes domino to fall.

 

 

 

 

KJP[/member] Any chance you can tell us what the "hitch" is?

KJP[/member] Any chance you can tell us what the "hitch" is?

 

Sure. Any school in Ohio that closes has to be offered to a charter school first. If there's no takers, then anyone can acquire the property. Max Hayes is probably too big for a charter to take over. But I can see a nefarious reason why an unscrupulous charter school would acquire it -- to drive up the resale price and then walk away enriched.

Construction Crew Spotted at Franklin Castle

 

Crews have been sighted on multiple occasions over the past few weeks working on windows and the interior. When Scene popped by this morning, evidence of recent work was certainly visible on the grounds of the 19th Century Victorian mansion, located at 4308 Franklin Blvd.

 

http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2014/08/22/construction-crew-spotted-at-franklin-castle

Mitchell's wants to provide outdoor seating......

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2014/crr09-15-2014.pdf

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

601 Lakeside Avenue, Room 519

Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1071

Phone: 216.664.2582 - Fax: 216.664.3281

September 15, 2014

City Hall - Room 514

 

9:30 Ward 3

Calendar No. 14-157: 1867 West 25th Street Joe Cimperman

14 Notices

P. and M. Ohio City LLC, owner, proposes to add outdoor seating for Mitchell’s Ice Cream located in a

C4 Local Retail Business District and a Pedestrian Retail Overlay (PRO). The owner appeals for relief

from the strict application of the following Sections of the Cleveland Codified Ordinances:Board of Zoning Appeals

Page 2

1. Section 349.04(f) which states that 14 parking off-street parking spaces are required; and

2. Section 343.23 (i) which states the required parking spaces are reduced by 33% when located

in a Pedestrian Retail Overlay District; in this case the total required off-street parking spaces

is 5 and none are proposed. (Filed August 6, 2014).

^Everything Mitchell's has done has been gold... outdoor seating would simply continue their winning streak.  It's such an awesome place.

Emerging after a long absence --  hi everyone!

 

Anyone know what's going on with the renovation project at Lorain and W. 29th, on the south side of the street? It's a small one-story building that looks to be getting quite an overhaul.

I believe Ignatius owns that building and is using it for a St. Vincent Charity Clinic. The appeal to design review was posted somewhere up thread.

 

Emerging after a long absence --  hi everyone!

 

Anyone know what's going on with the renovation project at Lorain and W. 29th, on the south side of the street? It's a small one-story building that looks to be getting quite an overhaul.

I just saw a job posting on /r/cleveland, looking for actors to be zombies in ohio city on weekends, it says it is not seasonal or temporary work.  Anyone have any information, could there be a zombie themed restaurant being planned?

 

Welcome, fishface! Care to share a selfie??

^ i doubt fishface has time to share a selfie. If like the rest of us,  his/her schedule is packed to the gills.

Welcome, fishface! Care to share a selfie??

 

Don't you mean a shellfie?

I am so sorry at what I started. So very sorry.... BACK ON TOPIC! :)

This probably won't go over well considering that the city is trying to make this a storefront district....

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2014/crr09-29-2014.pdf

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

September 29, 2014

 

9:30 Ward 3 Calendar No. 14-66: 4157 Lorain Avenue Joe Cimperman

19 Notices

Thomas Papouras, owner, proposes to establish a used car lot on a parcel of land that is 80’ x 125’, located in

a D3 Local Retail Business District and a Pedestrian Retail Overlay District (PRO). The owner appeals for relief

from the strict application of the following Cleveland Zoning Code Sections:

1. Section 343.11 (b)(2)(I)(4) which states that used auto sales is first permitted in General Retail Business.

2. Section 352.10 requiring a 4 foot wide frontage landscape strip along Lorain Avenue and West 42nd

Street.

3. Section 352.10 requiring a 10 foot wide transition strip at the rear where the property abuts a residential

district.

4. Section 347.11 requiring that the area for display of cars and customers parking must be hard surfaced

and drained within lot.

5. Section 349.04 (f) which states that an Auto sales lot must provide 25% of their gross lot area for

customer parking.

6. Section 343.23 (e)(1)(A) ~ PRO District prohibits opens sales/car lots (Filed May 5, 2014 – no testimony).

THIRD POSTPONEMENT REQUESTED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION UNTIL SEPTEMBER 29 TO ALLOW FOR A COMMISSION

REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE IN PRO.

Third postponement?  How hard is it to just say "no"?

Third postponement?  How hard is it to just say "no"?

Seriously! How many car lots exist just a couple streets over on Detroit.

This car lot has existed for several years on this corner. The operators have gathered signatures of all the adjacent land owners and support the continued use. All except for one... the brewery. I only know some of the drama, but it all surrounds the new brewery. This is going to be a fight

^Interesting. I assumed it was an application for a new use.  Why is the operator seeking relief if they are a legal non-conforming use?

 

[Edited for typo]

Keep fighting Platform! Screw these trashy used car lots. They don't contribute anything to the area whatsoever. Burn em down!

^You are... whatever. Not worth it

 

 

 

 

 

 

From what I have heard the City is working all of the businesses in the immediate surroundings of the new brewery in order to free up property that might lead to future expansion, development, and/or parking. I do not know all the facts though. I did some zoning consultation for one of the operators

^Interesting. I assumed it was an application for a new use.  Why is the operator seeking relief if they are a legal non-conforming use?

 

[Edited for typo]

Tacos, tacos, tacos... My wife is from Cincy and we've been to the original restaurant. They played a Clint Eastwood spaghetti western the entire time. #Awesome.

http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2014/09/15/popular-bakersfield-tacos-to-plant-its-flag-in-ohio-city

First I've heard of this.....

 

NHSGC Land Trust ‏@LandTrustCLE  2m

W. 45th St. Apts UPDATE: internal rewiring is almost complete, the facade is getting a Brick Road Red facelift

 

My dream was to snap up this property once I had enough saved up to buy it. It is a multi-family unit at the corner of W 45th and Franklin. It used to be baby blue and was all boarded up. It's a very atypical type of house for Cleveland. Almost more Cincinnati-ish. Alas, looks like I will have to find a new house!

^Interesting. I assumed it was an application for a new use.  Why is the operator seeking relief if they are a legal non-conforming use?

 

[Edited for typo]

 

My guess is that some neighbor raised the issue of the lot's non-conformance to the City.  Probably the Brewery, based on the above.

^But also based on the above, it's been a used car lot for several years, which would mean it predates the fairly recent pedestrian-oriented zoning from which the operator is seeking relief. Something is clearly missing from the story.  Typically a legal non-conforming use only needs zoning relief if it plans a significant alteration (or post-casualty reconstruction).  Alternatively, it's possible the lot went through a period of dis-use, so lost it's grandfathered status.  Neither scenario engenders much sympathy from me, to be honest. 

There also could be an amortization period applicable to the non-conforming use.

 

Putting all that aside, wouldn't the owner still have to get approval for the non-conforming use, regardless of whether it is 'grandfathered'?  In that case, it would be more of a formality, but maybe still required as a matter of process?  I honestly don't know.

 

^Interesting. I assumed it was an application for a new use.  Why is the operator seeking relief if they are a legal non-conforming use?

 

 

[Edited for typo]

 

 

My guess is that some neighbor raised the issue of the lot's non-conformance to the City.  Probably the Brewery, based on the above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

^But also based on the above, it's been a used car lot for several years, which would mean it predates the fairly recent pedestrian-oriented zoning from which the operator is seeking relief. Something is clearly missing from the story.  Typically a legal non-conforming use only needs zoning relief if it plans a significant alteration (or post-casualty reconstruction).  Alternatively, it's possible the lot went through a period of dis-use, so lost it's grandfathered status.  Neither scenario engenders much sympathy from me, to be honest. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A lot more to the story.

There also could be an amortization period applicable to the non-conforming use.

 

Putting all that aside, wouldn't the owner still have to get approval for the non-conforming use, regardless of whether it is 'grandfathered'?  In that case, it would be more of a formality, but maybe still required as a matter of process?  I honestly don't know.

 

Pretty sure there's no process. Unless you're trying to pull a permit, you have no affirmative obligation to prove your zoning compliance on an ongoing basis and certainly no substantive requirement to conform to the new zoning.  If a neighbor complains, and you can show you're a legal nonconforming use, the city has no (legal) grounds to give you a hard time based on zoning.  Obviously if you're also a nuisance, there may be non-zoning grounds.  Of course, there's plenty of room to litigate what constitutes an improvement significant enough to lose the grandfathering, or whether or not the use was actually operating continuously.

 

[Edit: typo]

Spaces announces lease deal is off with developer Michael Chesler on a building in Ohio City

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Spaces, the nonprofit West Side gallery looking for a new home, won't be moving as planned to Ohio City's Hingetown area in the near future.

 

John Farina, president of the gallery's board, said late Monday the gallery would let a lease option lapse this month with developer Michael Chesler on a one-story industrial building he owns at the southeast corner of West 29th Street and Detroit Avenue.

 

The gallery had hoped to sign a lease with Chesler in October on the 14,000-square-foot brick building, which stands catty corner to the newly established Transformer Station Gallery and near other cultural anchors including ICA Art Conservation and the BopStop jazz club, recently acquired by University Circle's Music Settlement as a West Side satellite.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/arts/index.ssf/2014/09/spaces_announces_lease_deal_is.html#incart_river

^Interesting. I assumed it was an application for a new use.  Why is the operator seeking relief if they are a legal non-conforming use?

 

[Edited for typo]

 

My guess is that some neighbor raised the issue of the lot's non-conformance to the City.  Probably the Brewery, based on the above.

 

On the original complaint that I saw, the complaint was filed by Tom McNair of Ohio City Inc.  I can't speak to whether or not he was acting on behalf of or to enrich anyone else though.  And the first postponement was because they and Cimperman thought it was going to be a slam dunk and the business owner showed up with letters of support from most of the neighboring businesses.  If I remember the timeline correctly, it was postponed so a community meeting could take place.  A meeting was scheduled and the owner was told by Cimperman's office (again, if memory serves) that the meeting was canceled.  He showed up anyway to find the meeting was taking place after all.  And I think that was the meeting that he went to where the geographic area for the group meeting (a block club) did not even extend in area to his business.  It goes on from there....

I had a bit of a wait for my bus this morning leaving Ohio City, so I decided to go see this place for myself. From across the street it appears to be the nicest looking of it's species (corner small lot used car sales). They have a planter barrier that helps mitigate the feeling that the cars are bursting out of the lot. As well as keeping them honest and not letting them take over the Lorain Ave sidewalk which is pretty typical behavior for this type of business. They did however appear to have a car parked out on the apron. They're probably trying to be on their best boy behavior, so I don't know if it's just a matter of time before they start taking over the whole area again like you can see on Google Streetview. I wish now that I had taken a look around back, but I was feeling crunched for time at that point.

The intrigue about the community meetings is interesting, I guess, but the main question still is why this owner needs any kind of zoning relief if the lot has been continuously operated as a legal used car lot. 

 

This 2012 CUDC write-up of a design charrette for the area has an interesting tidbit that might shed some light:

 

Used car lots are a predominant land use, with concentrations

of car lots at the western end of the corridor. Some of these used

car lots are legally operating businesses, while others lack city

approval and are in violation of city codes.

 

http://www.cudc.kent.edu/projects_research/research/LaunchLorainfinallowres03%2019%2012.pdf

 

I'm wondering now if the operator was never a legally operating business, so can't claim compliance with the prior zoning code, hence: "proposes to establish a used car lot" in the appeal for relief KJP excerpted above.