First of all, Welcome David.  A few thoughts to share:

 

a) The idea of having the whole, Lakeview complex is, I believe, going way to far in promoting the concept that every great setting should be occupied by the wealthy.  Lakeview is nationally historic.  It is not a slum which is nothing but a blot on everything around it, but a well conceived, well constructed, brick public housing estate that has been renovated and restored over time and includes important public art.  We have many locales, now, that take advantage of marvelous views of downtown Cleveland - many in Tremont alone, and going all the way to Chestnut Hills Drive bordering Cleveland Heights and the Gold Coast in Lakewood.  About 80 years ago this project was conceived to replace a decrepit shantytown, and that was enough of a major rehaul, as far as I'm concerned.  In fact, those low-rise public housing buildings along Franklin Boulevard, east of West 25th, were already demolished over ten years ago - that in itself created a lot of well-located land to redevelop.  I don't care for the enormous subsidized highrise on West 25th, but I certainly wouldn't advocate, either, its demolition, with all the needy people that would affect.

b) Just my l'l opinion, of course, but I don't particularly care for the "Hingetown" moniker.  It is all part of Ohio City - historically (all the way back to the early 19th century), and today as far as the Cleveland Planning Department is concerned. I'd like everyone to associate that vicinity with the entire remainder of Ohio City - the Market District, St. Ignatius, and all the rest.  I'd like people to think of Ohio City as going all all the way to Lake Erie. I'd like people to link the Victorians in so-called Hingetown with the Victorians along Bridge Avenue or even south of Lorain Avenue, or the shops in so-called Hingetown with the shops on Lorain Avenue.  As the name "Hingetown" is not historic there's no cause d'etre there.  If the concept of the name is the area serves as a "hinge" between Ohio City and Gordon Square or Detroit-Shoreway, it is not really that geographically.  That might be somewhere around West 48th into the West 50s.

 

Just the trite "my two cents"....

 

I found a pretty thorough discussion of Lakeview here that covers all the basic points, except that there is an often smelly water treatment plant nearby.  But the above is quite pollyanish, it's hardly some great model of succesful social engineering.  Ask the cops where pretty much anything stolen in OC or DS ends up.

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,27631.0.html

 

I don't think anyone has a real issue with the senior high rise.

Yeah I really don't think Lakeview is very successful at all. A lot of mid-century public housing projects have proven to be failures. Housing projects tend to just create more concentrated pockets of poverty - and all the social problems that go along with that. Some argue that there's also a psychological aspect: if people are living in a building that is ugly and looks like crap, they are less likely to respect the property. Mixed income developments are proving to be more successful in helping low-income people, while also promoting social interaction between people of different socioeconomic classes.

...  I think people need to work on their reading comprehension levels.

 

Welcome to the forum, I think you need to know the snarky comment isn't necessary.

 

But I'll admit that his point on reading comprehension is correct.

Yeah I really don't think Lakeview is very successful at all. A lot of mid-century public housing projects have proven to be failures. Housing projects tend to just create more concentrated pockets of poverty - and all the social problems that go along with that. Some argue that there's also a psychological aspect: if people are living in a building that is ugly and looks like crap, they are less likely to respect the property. Mixed income developments are proving to be more successful in helping low-income people, while also promoting social interaction between people of different socioeconomic classes.

 

I agree. Public housing is, and has been, a failure. I believe that mixed income developments are much more beneficial to the poor for many reasons

Yeah I really don't think Lakeview is very successful at all. A lot of mid-century public housing projects have proven to be failures. Housing projects tend to just create more concentrated pockets of poverty - and all the social problems that go along with that. Some argue that there's also a psychological aspect: if people are living in a building that is ugly and looks like crap, they are less likely to respect the property. Mixed income developments are proving to be more successful in helping low-income people, while also promoting social interaction between people of different socioeconomic classes.

 

If that property is indeed valuable, then it's in the best interest of CMHA to sell it and then use the proceeds toward its established goals.

 

To simply hold onto this land for the sake of history would then be a breach of common sense.

I'm pretty sure CMHA is planning to keep that property for the foreseeable future for the simple reason that it would cost a LOT of money to move 3,000 people somewhere else in the city.  CMHA has been offered millions for that land in the past, and I doubt they turned down the money because of history.

^ Yes, you're exactly right. "History" has nothing to do with it. I mean, if CMHA cared about history, maybe they wouldn't have torn down so many historic buildings to build their Soviet-bloc style developments. I do, however, think it's feasible to slowly redevelop Lakeview as a mixed use development - done block-by-block in phases. But, this would only be feasible once there is less of a separation between this area and the rest of Ohio City. By that, I mean tearing down the Main Ave. bridge, merging the Shoreway BOULEVARD onto Main Ave., and building an at-grade draw bridge connecting both bank of the Flats. This would do wonders for connectivity between neighborhoods, and could spur a lot of development. I made this picture for another thread, to illustrate this idea:

 

donking - "Warehouse District" as part of Hingetown?  You mean THE Warehouse District between West 3rd and West 10th Street, or are you referring to the buildings north of Detroit Avenue?

 

As for Lakeview, I didn't say CMHA considers it is historic, I said it IS historic in the history of public housing in the U.S.  I'll go along with what the historian wrote in the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History: "Lakeview Terrace [is] internationally known as a landmark in public housing."  And there definitely has been some restoration over the years, and I believe its impressive WPA artworks have been restored.  There must be something to the fact that other CMHA estates - newer (e.g. King Kennedy) and older (e.g. Valleyview Homes) have been completely replaced or rebuilt, while Lakeview has remained.  Also, Urbanophile, what "historic" properties were demolished to build Cleveland's public housing projects? You mean just "old?"  If something actually historic was demolished, it would have been many decades ago when there was in general very, very little local interest in architectural preservation.  There is far more interest here and the around the U.S. today, and there's no reason to link current CMHA policy with what the agency was responsible for sixty or seventy years ago.

 

^The high level bridge allows commuters and river freight to ignore each other entirely, while a drawbridge would set them at odds.  People balked at traffic lights, so now we'll ask rush hour to wait for passing ships?

 

And the shoreway itself serves an important purpose in absorbing commuter traffic from tighter, denser city streets.  Putting all that traffic on Main Avenue would hamper Main's development into an ideal pedestrian-oriented mixed-use neighborhood street.  That transition started years ago, so all those people living nearby might take issue with this plan as well.  Ultimately the shoreway and its bridge benefit adjacent areas by allowing them to focus on being the best urban neighborhoods they can be.  Making those neighborhoods accommodate commuters would split that focus, and would reduce the ceiling for the kind of development we actually want. 

^The high level bridge allows commuters and river freight to ignore each other entirely, while a drawbridge would set them at odds.  People balked at traffic lights, so now we'll ask rush hour to wait for passing ships?

 

And the shoreway itself serves an important purpose in absorbing commuter traffic from tighter, denser city streets.  Putting all that traffic on Main Avenue would hamper Main's development into an ideal pedestrian-oriented mixed-use neighborhood street.  That transition started years ago, so all those people living nearby might take issue with this plan as well.  Ultimately the shoreway and its bridge benefit adjacent areas by allowing them to focus on being the best urban neighborhoods they can be.  Making those neighborhoods accommodate commuters would split that focus, and would reduce the ceiling for the kind of development we actually want.

 

What kind of pedestrian setting will you get when the buildings on the north side are built 30 yards set back from Main Ave? The onramps, and pillars along Main are going to be a serious impediment for new construction adjacent to the bridge. Main could be widened to accommodate more traffic without killing pedestrians.

As for Lakeview, I didn't say CMHA considers it is historic, I said it IS historic in the history of public housing in the U.S.  I'll go along with what the historian wrote in the Encyclopedia of Cleveland History: "Lakeview Terrace [is] internationally known as a landmark in public housing."  And there definitely has been some restoration over the years, and I believe its impressive WPA artworks have been restored.  There must be something to the fact that other CMHA estates - newer (e.g. King Kennedy) and older (e.g. Valleyview Homes) have been completely replaced or rebuilt, while Lakeview has remained.  Also, Urbanophile, what "historic" properties were demolished to build Cleveland's public housing projects? You mean just "old?"  If something actually historic was demolished, it would have been many decades ago when there was in general very, very little local interest in architectural preservation.  There is far more interest here and the around the U.S. today, and there's no reason to link current CMHA policy with what the agency was responsible for sixty or seventy years ago.

 

There were some pretty nice buildings along W. 25th that CMHA had torn down. But yeah I probably shouldn't have mentioned that bit about the CMHA not caring about history. I know there has been a bit of a paradigm shift since then, so I shouldn't blame the current CMHA for what was done decades ago. However, my main point was about the overall failures of the traditional model of public housing. Lakeview Terrace may be famous for a public housing project, but it's still experiencing many of the same failures that stem naturally from that model. I think Lakeview needs to be slowly redeveloped as a mixed-use development, for the sake of the surrounding neighborhoods, and for the sake of people who utilize public housing.

 

^The high level bridge allows commuters and river freight to ignore each other entirely, while a drawbridge would set them at odds.  People balked at traffic lights, so now we'll ask rush hour to wait for passing ships?

 

And the shoreway itself serves an important purpose in absorbing commuter traffic from tighter, denser city streets.  Putting all that traffic on Main Avenue would hamper Main's development into an ideal pedestrian-oriented mixed-use neighborhood street.  That transition started years ago, so all those people living nearby might take issue with this plan as well.  Ultimately the shoreway and its bridge benefit adjacent areas by allowing them to focus on being the best urban neighborhoods they can be.  Making those neighborhoods accommodate commuters would split that focus, and would reduce the ceiling for the kind of development we actually want. 

 

I'm not accounting for traffic as much as you are. The plan I suggested is not something I would expect to be completed ASAP. Trends are showing that younger generations are driving significantly less than older generations, and the eventual inevitable rise in gas prices will only speed that trend up. My plan rests on the assumption that the Shoreway has been converted back into a boulevard, and that more people are willing to use public transit, while less are driving.

 

The truth is that the Main Ave. bridge is creating a huge divide between neighborhoods, and completely blocking development below it. This is all done for the sake of efficiently funneling as many cars in and around the city as possible. So why continue to cater to cars when cars are becoming increasingly less popular as a mode of transportation? Eventually that bridge will have to come down (it's a similar type of construction to the innerbelt bridge, and older too), and when it comes to that, it would be insanely expensive to build a new mile-long bridge.

 

Besides, a car could also use the Detroit-Superior Bridge, or maybe even the Center Street bridge so avoid the traffic of the hypothetical Main Ave. drawbridge.

I'm not sure the replacement of Lakeview, if it happens, can be done gradually.  It's become one of our more aggressive slums and is indeed a drag on the surrounding areas.  It would even be more of one on plans to change the immediate area to bring in people with other options.  It's not so much a matter of mixing incomes as attempting to mix cultures that traditionally don't mix well.  The Chicago approach might be necessary and that has helped the area where the towers were only at significant cost to the region.

 

Plus they would have to do something about the odors from the water treatment plant.  I used to be a huge advocate of what this neighborhood could be, and to a degree still am, but I've become more skeptical.

If someone wants to create a thread for the speculative relocation of Lakeview and replacement of Main Avenue Bridge, they are welcome to do so. However, this thread isn't the place for that discussion.

donking - "Warehouse District" as part of Hingetown?  You mean THE Warehouse District between West 3rd and West 10th Street, or are you referring to the buildings north of Detroit Avenue?

 

 

Yes, the Warehouse District downtown -- it's noted on the Hingetown website

If someone wants to create a thread for the speculative relocation of Lakeview and replacement of Main Avenue Bridge, they are welcome to do so. However, this thread isn't the place for that discussion.

 

Or revive this one:  http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,27631.0.html

Wow -  it seems so strange someone would link the Warehouse District downtown with the neighborhood around West 29th Street and Detroit Avenue with one name as one district!  That's another reason I don't like the "Hingetown" moniker.

Lakeview Terrace is not a "slum!"  It is a public housing estate with many people without a lot of financial means, presumably (and, I also assume, with very few whites living there).  As for the idea of turning it into a mixed-income development, I'm not against that at all if households are not forced out just for that reason.  I like mixed income, and mixed age, too for single buildings and complexes.

 

 

Okay - I just ventured over to Hingetown's website and found it only says that Hingetown is located "Ohio City's Market District, the Gordon Square Arts District, and the Warehouse District."  It does not say it is "inclusive of the Warehouse District," as was stated above.  That, frankly, would seem terribly far fetched.

lafont -- Hingetown is the neighborhood / "Hinge" that facilitates a connection between three districts, one of which is the Warehouse District. I'm not stating that the Warehouse District is a part of Hingetown. But it is a stone's throw away and is part of the conversation when you think about the established surrounding communities.

I'm just happy to have some connection happening, whatever we call it.  For too many years Cleveland's urban renaissance has existed in tiny little enclaves, not connected to any others.  It's nice to see Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway inching closer to each other.   

I'm just happy to have some connection happening, whatever we call it.  For too many years Cleveland's urban renaissance has existed in tiny little enclaves, not connected to any others.  It's nice to see Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway inching closer to each other.   

 

That's how strong lasting development and renewal seems to happen.  Enclaves growing block by block until they come together.  This is why some of us were so skeptical of "alternate" proposals for the Opportunity Corridor area.

I just checked the Hingetown website as well.

 

LaFont - It seems very well put together and it's pretty explicit saying that it is BETWEEN Ohio City, Gordon Square and the Warehouse District.

I just checked the Hingetown website as well.

 

LaFont - It seems very well put together and it's pretty explicit saying that it is BETWEEN Ohio City, Gordon Square and the Warehouse District.

 

I never really understood that. There's a lot of space between the Warehouse District and "Hingetown."

Yes, the website is very explicit in its reference to the Warehouse District.  Why don't the Hingetown people mention the Flats, while they're at it?

 

 

Alright, the nitpicking of what entails/qualifies Hingetown and related periphery is a valid discussion, but not for this thread.

A few slides from the proposed Snavely mixed-use development. The rest at Landmarks commission.

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2015/03122015/index.php

Landmarks also had this lovely photo from Snavely's presentation:

 

 

And a couple of renders from the Shoreway....

 

 

^ So you can sit in your pool and overlook Lakeview Estates.

 

Awesome project, interesting juxtaposition.

I think the elevated highway blocks the view of the estates but Lakeview Tower will certainly be visible.

Glad to see another indication of the park on east side of West 25th.  I'd think the developer would eventually want to put something in between the single family residence and Massimo along 25th - the views will be too nice to be used for parking. 

 

Agree with SixthCity that the juxtaposition will be interesting with a grocery next to Linda's superette and a pool next to the shoreway. I catch the bus from this corner everyday and while it is not unsafe, there are some characters around.  Hope to see some construction and demolition for the park soon.

^ So you can sit in your pool and overlook Lakeview Estates.

 

Awesome project, interesting juxtaposition.

 

But on the other side if you live at Lakeview you are probably thinking, "they are finally going to build something nice to look at on that crappy parking lot"... :wink:

There is a school listed on the tenant mix.  I wonder if they have somebody already in mind?

This project is going to be a slam dunk.  It's bold and really pushes the boundaries of gentrification on the edge of downtown.  I think there is so much upside for this area as the City evolves, if they can make the numbers work with base rents now, it will be even better in the near future

Here, here!

This project is going to be a slam dunk.  It's bold and really pushes the boundaries of gentrification on the edge of downtown.  I think there is so much upside for this area as the City evolves, if they can make the numbers work with base rents now, it will be even better in the near future

 

Be careful with that "G" word.

 

Exciting stuff though.

This project is going to be a slam dunk.  It's bold and really pushes the boundaries of gentrification on the edge of downtown.  I think there is so much upside for this area as the City evolves, if they can make the numbers work with base rents now, it will be even better in the near future

 

Agreed I am really stoked for the area. This project is a game changer. And hopefully the proposed park can come together. Would love to see those scattered buildings come down across 25th. and open up the views. Also does anyone know the status of the Adobe project by the market. I think there has been some demo.

In slide 2 they are apparently proposing to demolish the Terminal Tower...

This is the first I think I've heard of this one.  Looks great!  When's it scheduled to start? 

Wasn't Linda's Superette and possibly the Jamestown building next door proposed to be demolished as part of the Lakefront West plan?

Found this slide - but it was from a 2010 presentation. Perhaps this was removed since then.

Yeah, that's pretty bad. Rounding off the intersection's curb where Linda's Superette is now only increases traffic speed through that area and makes it more dangerous for pedestrians and bikes. A hard-right turn at an intersection is old-school traffic calming.

Regarding the single-family townhouse... are they going to be removing the retail space from that building? I don't know what technically designates something as a townhouse, but in my mind I don't usually think of a townhouse as having retail.

Have to agree that the "amenity deck" will not have the most scenic views. Also, will people really want to live this close to tenement housing/shoreway/low income housing in the same development? The inclusion of a pool at the North building implies that they hope to create class-A product. High-end rents downtown are currently $2 psf or $1,500/mo for a 750 sf 1 BR. I hope they are not planning on anything near those rents at the North Building.

 

Wouldn't be surprised to see that pool deck scrapped and mid-grade product at the North building if this project progresses.

Have to agree that the "amenity deck" will not have the most scenic views. Also, will people really want to live this close to tenement housing/shoreway/low income housing in the same development? The inclusion of a pool at the North building implies that they hope to create class-A product. High-end rents downtown are currently $2 psf or $1,500/mo for a 750 sf 1 BR. I hope they are not planning on anything near those rents at the North Building.

 

Wouldn't be surprised to see that pool deck scrapped and mid-grade product at the North building if this project progresses.

People sure don't have an issue one block down paying over $1,000 a month to live so close to Lakeview...I doubt these will either.

As a renter, people are a lot more comfortable renting in proximity to what is perceived to be/is an unsavory part of town, as opposed to buying.

Fair enough W28th but are they willing to pay rents at the high end of the market in order to do so? Stonebridge rents look like they're ~$1 psf (based on available units on their website). With the recent, ongoing and in-place pipeline developments, renters will have a lot of options. This project's location would suggest that they will not have much pricing power. That said, Mariner's Watch is marketing ~$1.7 psf rents in their pre-leasing. It will be interesting to see how they do.

Fair enough W28th but are they willing to pay rents at the high end of the market in order to do so? Stonebridge rents look like they're ~$1 psf (based on available units on their website). With the recent, ongoing and in-place pipeline developments, renters will have a lot of options. This project's location would suggest that they will not have much pricing power. That said, Mariner's Watch is marketing ~$1.7 psf rents in their pre-leasing. It will be interesting to see how they do.

 

All questions are answered in a magical place called "The Future." Book your reservations today! :)

Fair enough W28th but are they willing to pay rents at the high end of the market in order to do so? Stonebridge rents look like they're ~$1 psf (based on available units on their website). With the recent, ongoing and in-place pipeline developments, renters will have a lot of options. This project's location would suggest that they will not have much pricing power. That said, Mariner's Watch is marketing ~$1.7 psf rents in their pre-leasing. It will be interesting to see how they do.

 

For me personally (and I am looking to rent in the city in the next two years), with everything I am aware of in the "pipeline" this would be my preferred location and I would be willing to pay the higher rents.  This is the ideal walkable location to so many different things, and is just like being downtown without being downtown.  Many of the views of the skyline will be incredible (you get the whole skyline unlike if you were in the center of downtown).  This and the Duck Island development are the two on my radar screen.

Some secure, preferably below grade, parking for residents would make this the perfect project. Otherwise it hits all the right marks -- replaces a huge surface lot, built up to the sidewalk, mixed use,  decent design. A little surprised it doesn't have a garage. The last few announced projects all do. An underground garage would make people like nick more comfortable than parking outside. Plus it would leave more space for patrons or allow them to shrink the amount of asphalt.

Some secure, preferably below grade, parking for residents would make this the perfect project. Otherwise it hits all the right marks -- replaces a huge surface lot, built up to the sidewalk, mixed use,  decent design. A little surprised it doesn't have a garage. The last few announced projects all do. An underground garage would make people like nick more comfortable than parking outside. Plus it would leave more space for patrons or allow them to shrink the amount of asphalt.

 

It does have an underground garage. The entrance is from a curb-cut on Detroit at the western-most part of the new building.

^ Very nice. The pictures on the the planning commission agenda didn't really make that clear (or I just missed it).