A shame they got rid of the trellises on the top floor. That was a nice feature.

12 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

BRAVO! I love it. -  Very handsome. YIMBY to this design 😃, and kudos to the neighbors who stood up for excellence.

This new look and size is in excellent context with the balance of the street, (which it should be for this tight knit community.)

As one of the very few mostly intact townhouse row communities remaining in all of Cleveland, this was the successful sensitive choice. 

Hessler Street is practically dripping with human-scaled charm & early 20th Century texture & pedestrian scale, so something way out of tune would never have worked. - I'm super pleased.

 

The street elevation facing out to Hessler is exactly what I would be able to view from the second floor balcony of my former apartment at lovely & historic 1961 Ford across the street.

 

🙄

 

Hessler is not a "townhouse row community".  There is a mix of townhouses, singles or doubles (probably mostly cut up into apartments), and apartments.  But hey, "YIMBY" to filling in a parking lot with infill housing.

What are the odds that the revised design is able to go forward?

12 hours ago, gg707 said:

What are the odds that the revised design is able to go forward?

It's Cleveland. Very high. 

They literally could've just chopped one floor off of the original design and it would have been better....

On 4/11/2021 at 2:42 PM, ExPatClevGuy said:

BRAVO! I love it. -  Very handsome. YIMBY to this design 😃, and kudos to the neighbors who stood up for excellence.

This new look and size is in excellent context with the balance of the street, (which it should be for this tight knit community.)

As one of the very few mostly intact townhouse row communities remaining in all of Cleveland, this was the successful sensitive choice. 

Hessler Street is practically dripping with human-scaled charm & early 20th Century texture & pedestrian scale, so something way out of tune would never have worked. - I'm super pleased.

 

The street elevation facing out to Hessler is exactly what I would be able to view from the second floor balcony of my former apartment at lovely & historic 1961 Ford across the street.

 

At this point, you're just trolling with this comment and your comments in the Ohio City thread regarding "neighbors who stood up for excellence", when it's not actually excellence at all.  You've made your point. Please move on.

 

That was unnecessary.

It's all so subjective, isn't it?  We all decide when it's okay to sell out the interests of community residents because we as outsiders prefer a "certain type" of development for them on their behalf, but their interests matter - of course they matter.

 

The details of this development on Hessler Street really won't make a difference at all to you or me in the end; not like they will matter to the residents who will experience them day-in and day-out.  When residents are truly happy, neighborhoods grow and thrive and succeed.  That is what I want for every community, not just my own.

Edited April 13, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy

That's great and all, but I don't really see the loud voices you see coming out to complain about development as being representative of the neighborhood.  They represent themselves.  In a neighborhood with constant turnover of students, especially, I highly doubt that they are even close to being representative of the people who live there.  Let alone that people that will live there in another 5 years.

Balance is a thing tho.

 

I may have gotten somehow lost and accidentally posted in "Urban Ohio Northeast One-sided Support for Developers over Residents," but that's okay. It's still a good place to point out community voices in neighborhood projects like this one - a street where I actually lived personally.

 

I'm glad for those who know the background and makeup of all the residents who reside on Hessler Street, yet residents still outnumber by 100% the amount developers who live on this street.

 

Developers welcome!  Still, residential neighborhoods are not the place to simply do-as-they-please. Even in commercial districts there are reasonable controls and aesthetic reccomendtions made in support of communities before construction begins.    

Looks like it belongs in a crappy Florida neighborhood. Paint will be peeling in a couple years, can't wait.

On 4/12/2021 at 10:26 PM, ExPatClevGuy said:

 

The details of this development on Hessler Street really won't make a difference at all to you or me in the end; not like they will matter to the residents who will experience them day-in and day-out.  When residents are truly happy, neighborhoods grow and thrive and succeed.  That is what I want for every community, not just my own.

 

There's truth to this, but the problem is that lots of residents do not actually understand what types of development create a thriving liveable area. It sounds paternalistic to say it, but it's true.

 

A significant part of any legal practice is explaining to clients why what they want to do is a bad idea. For doctors, they often have to tell patients things they do not want to hear about lifestyle choices. It's the same way with urban planning. Opinionated and under-informed people have strong ideas about what they want, but that doesn't mean they actually know what they will want at the end of the day. To use an example from the same neighborhood, if a developer tried to build the Commodore Place building today (the one at the corner of Ford and Euclid; big old brick building), there would probably be outrage from many residents. "It's too big." "It will block all the light." "There's no new parking, and the garage across the street is already very busy." "It's going to attract the wrong kind of tenants."

 

But with the building in place, it's wonderful, and I doubt anyone complains about it. It's because what people think they want is not necessarily what they actually want.

 

I'm not saying I'm an expert on any of this either. I do not have an urban planning degree, and lots of others on this forum do not. But most people on this forum have spent a decent amount of time thinking about urban planning and what creates a vibrant community. As such, most folks on this forum do have a perspective that most local residents do not.

Thanks for not going to go back to Cleveland City neighborhood owners & residents not knowing what they desire or what is good for themselves? 
This is 12 units of great quality housing being added to a limited-two and multi-family historic neighborhood street that is already awesome, very dense, and vibrant.  It is is not some void that needs urban improvement by packing folk into the neighborhood like anonymous sardines.  The great urban low-automobile density is already here. It already looks and feels great.

This new version looks sensational, and the addition of 12-24+ new residents to this street is an awesome number. They will enjoy sharing larger more luxuriously sized units than the original plan.

I can't even imagine the paint peeling from the siding product to be used.

7 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

Thanks for not going to go back to Cleveland City neighborhood owners & residents not knowing what they desire or what is good for themselves? 
This is 12 units of great quality housing being added to a limited-two and multi-family historic neighborhood street that is already awesome, very dense, and vibrant.  It is is not some void that needs urban improvement by packing folk into the neighborhood like anonymous sardines.  The great urban low-automobile density is already here. It already looks and feels great.

This new version looks sensational, and the addition of 12-24+ new residents to this street is an awesome number. They will enjoy sharing larger more luxuriously sized units than the original plan.

I can't even imagine the paint peeling from the siding product to be used.

 

 

Unfortunately, despite all the benefits of this new updated design that you point out (and that I agree with), the NIMBYs in that area are still trying to stop this from being built.  They are posting all over the various facebook groups for different neighborhoods trying to rally support against the building.  I think it is pretty clear that many of them are opposed to essentially all forms of development in that location and would be happier with an empty lot for cars.

36 minutes ago, gg707 said:

...  I think it is pretty clear that many of them are opposed to essentially all forms of development in that location and would be happier with an empty lot for cars.

It is near a college...

2 hours ago, gg707 said:

 

Unfortunately, despite all the benefits of this new updated design that you point out (and that I agree with), the NIMBYs in that area are still trying to stop this from being built.  They are posting all over the various facebook groups for different neighborhoods trying to rally support against the building.  I think it is pretty clear that many of them are opposed to essentially all forms of development in that location and would be happier with an empty lot for cars.

Yep. This revised proposal isn't some improved vision that the neighbors fought for. They all hate it just as much. The street is full of sings saying "NO NEW DEVELOPMENT ON HESSLER." The coalition isn't requesting that the density be changed or the architecture be different: They're demanding nothing be built or renovated whatsoever. This is NIMBY to the extreme.

From their website:

The Hessler Community’s List of Demands:

-Demand the restoration of Hessler’s stone sidewalks and curbs, century old sewers, brick and wood block paving and tree-scape. Hessler Road Historic District is Cleveland’s first historic district. The Cleveland Landmarks Commission was born out of the work done to protect Hessler. Hessler Court, the wood-block road, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

-Demand that UCI, Russell Berusch and Rick Maron honor the failed commitments they’ve made and repair the damage they’ve done to the Hessler Road Historic District, it’s community and it’s closest allies, the stewards of this street for decades.

-Demand a true public meeting and a process that includes the community.

-Demand that renovations at 1975 and 1981 Ford Drive do not displace tenants and do not allow rent by the bedroom in 1981 Ford. The Hessler community demands access to affordable, owner-occupied housing. The $940/bedroom for rent Berusch is getting in his Hessler 113 Townhomes is outrageous. His tenants are disruputve and unsupervised. This is ruining the character of the historic district.

-Protect Hessler’s cultural legacy, home of the Hessler Street Fair, born out of bringing people together to provide vigilance for this street, constantly under threat of development and demolition.

-Demand no new development and preserve the historic garage and backyard of 1975 Ford Drive as a shared community and event space in perpetuity for the Hessler community and the Street Fair.

-Demand an end to the kinds of tax abatements that usher in developers who gobble up land and neighborhoods without regard for the fragile web of community that grew there over time.

As someone who lived on Hessler a few years ago, I just sent an email in support of development co-opting the group link of email addresses on the coalition's site https://hesslerstreet.wordpress.com/ (Under the section "Fast, Effective and Easy Way to Help"). This goes to Councilman Blaine Griffin, Kim Scott Neighborhood Planner and chair of The Euclid Corridor Design Review Committee, and Karl Brunjes and Donald Petit with the Cleveland Landmarks Commission.

I encourage anyone else with a connection to Hessler or who is currently living in University Circle to send an email in support of this project. The best way to counter a NIMBY is with a YIMBY.

15 minutes ago, tykaps said:

As someone who lived on Hessler a few years ago, I just sent an email in support of development co-opting the group link of email addresses on the coalition's site https://hesslerstreet.wordpress.com/ (Under the section "Fast, Effective and Easy Way to Help"). This goes to Councilman Blaine Griffin, Kim Scott Neighborhood Planner and chair of The Euclid Corridor Design Review Committee, and Karl Brunjes and Donald Petit with the Cleveland Landmarks Commission.

I encourage anyone else with a connection to Hessler or who is currently living in University Circle to send an email in support of this project. The best way to counter a NIMBY is with a YIMBY.

 

100% agree on making voices heard of people who support development.  In the Waverly & Oak meeting, they even noted with surprise all of the supportive letters/emails they received and it seemed like those moved the needle. 

Developers propose smaller apartment building on historic Hessler Road in Cleveland following residents’ concerns

Eric Heisig - Cleveland.com - Apr. 15, 2021

 

"The downscaled plans, which also include renovations to two other apartment buildings that face Ford Drive, were discussed during a Thursday meeting of the Euclid Corridor Design Review Committee. The new iteration came after several meetings the developers and University Circle Inc. held with residents about the site’s future, Maron and University Circle Inc. President Chris Ronayne said. The design review committee gave its blessing to the concept Maron and Berusch proposed with some minor stipulations. Two members voted against it. ... The Cleveland Landmarks Commission is scheduled to weigh in during its meeting next week."

The more I think about the "evolution" of the Hessler project, the angrier I get.  The single biggest thing that Cleveland needs is more residents.  And with many neighborhoods still losing residents, it is critical that the city capitalize on its popular neighborhoods and encourage more development.  The original proposal was 23 units.  The revised proposal is 12 units.  The vitality of the project is cut in half, but the overall change in bulk as viewed from the street is minimal.  Furthermore, I'm sure the costs are NOT cut in half, making it harder for the developer to hit their desired numbers, thus discouraging further development.

 

This is on Cleveland's main transit corridor.  The city needs to do everything it can to maximize development along this corridor.

 

Preference for the appearance of one version or the other is completely subjective.  Claiming to like one version or the other would be reasonable.  I prefer the original, but different people can like different things.  That said, claiming the new version is objectively better, especially in light of how much is being sacrificed for the change, is completely ridiculous.  The city is losing nearly HALF of what this project was going to add before it got all mucked up.  And some vocal neighbors are still angry about it.  Just infuriating.  City neighborhoods thrive on people - let's get as many in as we can.

 

Old 23 unit version:

 

New 12 unit version.  12!!  (I wish they would have put the Uptown building in the background the way it actually appears to show how silly it was to "scale down" this building, which is practically as tall as it was before, just featuring half the units!)

 

Old 23 unit version:

 

New 12 unit version.  Please don't try to tell me that this is making some big difference in appearance.  Look at the building right across the street! (Taller than the original version.)  Think about Uptown, immediately behind it.  Or the 133', 12 story Commodore Place apartment building that is less than 75 yards from this property.

 

Argh grumble grumble grumble.

 

Wrong. The neighbors on Little One-way Hessler Street do not need nor desire 30-48 new neighbors who developers "pretend" will not own cars.

 

12-24 new neighbors does seem about "just right" for this tiny residential one-lane one-way street with already over 100 residents. It dead ends too, except for a hard left turn onto Hessler Court; paved with wooden blocks from the 1910s.

 

Put the larger planned 48-new-occupants structure out where it belongs - off this small residential block and into the mix of larger structures on a broader mixed-use thoroughfare a block or more away from Hessler Street.

 

We can kill Cleveland's already cool & vibe-ey urban places by slavishly following the careless principle of "more is always better."

 

It's so nice on Hessler Street:

https://youtu.be/TZwvow0Ab8c

 

Edited April 17, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy

I’m still sore there apparently weren’t enough people to keep the Barking Spider open. That was a real loss. 

On 4/16/2021 at 10:41 PM, ExPatClevGuy said:

The neighbors on Little One-way Hessler Street do not need nor desire 30-48 new neighbors who developers "pretend" will not own cars.

It will be mostly college students who mostly don't own cars, no need to pretend. I go to case right now and maybe a third of my friends have a car.

Thanks for making my point for me.  30% of 48 new residents = 14.5+ cars added to this tiny residential street.

I'm sure that wishful thinkers presume that it will be 100% students living on little one-way Hessler,  but this is inaccurate.  Hessler Street is near the center Ohio's fastest growing employment district, and all residents will not be getting all their meals & foodstuffs at CWRU Fribly or via GrubHub delivery, and not all will shop at expensive boutique & convenience stores.  These apartments are not all going to be treated as graduate student dorms.

Edited April 27, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy

not all those cars will be on Hessler, they're building off street parking and a few of my friends living on Hessler pay for a parking permit with case to park in lot 46 by the track and field. It's pretty easy to live car free even as someone not going to case. The Healthline and red line give easy access to the clinic and downtown. Dave's cedar hill is only a short bike ride away, and Aldi is right down the healthline a few stops. There's a zip car rental thing right across ford in the parking garage for any trips not well served by the RTA. 

 

17 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

Hessler Street is near the center Ohio's fastest growing employment district

Exactly there's a growing demand to live on Hessler, and supply needs to grow with it. Otherwise the demand will drive up rent and make it unaffordable for long time residents. What does Hessler lose by turning an eyesore of a dirt lot into housing? Currently it stands out a void, on a road that everywhere else is surrounded by housing. I think it would give Hessler a more complete feel. When was the last time you were on Hessler anyway? To paraphrase Jane Jacobs, cities are living places that change over time. What you remember Hessler as is not what it is today and that's not bad, I would argue that it's good actually. 

1 hour ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

Thanks for making my point for me.  30% of 48 new residents = 14.5+ cars added to this tiny residential street.

I'm sure that wishful thinkers presume that it will be 100% students living on little one-way Hessler,  but this is inaccurate.  Hessler Street is near the center Ohio's fastest growing employment district, and all residents will not be getting all their meals & foodstuffs at CWRU Fribly or via GrubHub delivery, and not all will shop at expensive boutique & convenience stores.  These apartments are not all going to be treated as graduate student dorms.

If the current residents think that too many cars is bad for their street, then they can get rid of theirs. Why should they be the only cars on the street just because the moved their first? That is peak NIMBY.

Nothing to see here. The parking will be accommodated in a new lot behind the new building.

2 minutes ago, KJP said:

Nothing to see here. The parking will be accommodated in a new lot behind the new building.

NIMBYS look for any angle to block development.  I've seen some social media organizing to stop this development.  Their reasoning is that open space is needed there and if anything new is built then it'll be easier to demolish existing structures.  It never makes sense.

Alright, we can complain about NIMBY's all day, but it really isn't the purpose of this thread.

On 4/14/2021 at 11:27 AM, LlamaLawyer said:

 

There's truth to this, but the problem is that lots of residents do not actually understand what types of development create a thriving liveable area. It sounds paternalistic to say it, but it's true.

 

A significant part of any legal practice is explaining to clients why what they want to do is a bad idea. For doctors, they often have to tell patients things they do not want to hear about lifestyle choices. It's the same way with urban planning. Opinionated and under-informed people have strong ideas about what they want, but that doesn't mean they actually know what they will want at the end of the day. To use an example from the same neighborhood, if a developer tried to build the Commodore Place building today (the one at the corner of Ford and Euclid; big old brick building), there would probably be outrage from many residents. "It's too big." "It will block all the light." "There's no new parking, and the garage across the street is already very busy." "It's going to attract the wrong kind of tenants."

 

But with the building in place, it's wonderful, and I doubt anyone complains about it. It's because what people think they want is not necessarily what they actually want.

 

I'm not saying I'm an expert on any of this either. I do not have an urban planning degree, and lots of others on this forum do not. But most people on this forum have spent a decent amount of time thinking about urban planning and what creates a vibrant community. As such, most folks on this forum do have a perspective that most local residents do not.

 

On the other hand, many planners fall victim to what we have called "Sim City Syndrome" here, designing something based upon their own preferences rather than those who will be directly impacted.   Or even something that will require more planning, and planners, moving forward.

On 4/27/2021 at 5:46 PM, E Rocc said:

 

On the other hand, many planners fall victim to what we have called "Sim City Syndrome" here, designing something based upon their own preferences rather than those who will be directly impacted.   Or even something that will require more planning, and planners, moving forward.

 

A doctor takes an oath to provide care even when the patient may not want it. But the interactive functions of organs, tissue, blood and bones of a human body are comparatively simple compared to that of a community and a city. An educated city planner knows what organs, tissue, types of circulation systems and bones are the basic ingredients and interactions of healthy urban design. They are required to make for successful communities, certainly more than those who will be directly impacted. Unfortunately, the health of a community is intruded upon by its own infections and cancers, including racism and other ignorance-based fears, apathy, armchair experts, self-interest and the worst metastasizing killer, politics.

 

Speaking of which, I heard the Euclid Corridor design review committee voted today (May 6) 4 to 2 (with 4 absentees) against the Hessler building proposal. The Landmarks Commission meeting of May 13 should be interesting.

On 4/27/2021 at 10:37 AM, ExPatClevGuy said:

Thanks for making my point for me.  30% of 48 new residents = 14.5+ cars added to this tiny residential street.

I'm sure that wishful thinkers presume that it will be 100% students living on little one-way Hessler,  but this is inaccurate.  Hessler Street is near the center Ohio's fastest growing employment district, and all residents will not be getting all their meals & foodstuffs at CWRU Fribly or via GrubHub delivery, and not all will shop at expensive boutique & convenience stores.  These apartments are not all going to be treated as graduate student dorms.

 

Whoa, missed this the first time.   People who live off campus eat at Fribley???    Granted it was forever ago, but when I was there one of the most compelling reasons to get out of the dorms was the food service.

Leutner Commons is closer, if you want the most convenient inedible meals

21 minutes ago, bjk said:

Leutner Commons is closer, if you want the most convenient inedible meals

 

As I said, it's been awhile.

The only thing I recall being edible was breakfast at Tomlinson.   Every so often I simply needed to hit Valentinos.

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

Whoa, missed this the first time.   People who live off campus eat at Fribley???    Granted it was forever ago, but when I was there one of the most compelling reasons to get out of the dorms was the food service.

Nope. The new upperclassmen suites have decent kitchens, so it's not as big of a reason to move off campus, but mostly by junior and senior most people are off the meal plan or down to a couple of meals a week. 

New Cleveland apartment building on Hessler Road gets approval, despite street fair opposition

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio (WOIO) - The city of Cleveland Landmarks Commission voted 7-2 to allow developers to go forward with a three-story, 12-unit apartment building on some open space behind a Ford Road property on Hessler Road.

 

https://www.cleveland19.com/2021/05/27/new-cleveland-apartment-building-hessler-road-gets-approval-despite-street-fair-opposition/

Time to move on neighbors.  You got a better product after the redesign. It's over. 

 

The new owners are under no obligation to allow their private property to be used for the fair.

Perhaps it's time to close off a portion of Ford Road in order for there to be enough space for that seasonal activity.

Edited May 28, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy

Yeah, but that's the problem.  They didn't want a better product.  They wanted no product at all.

It’s too bad this proposal was made worse by the redesign, but at least it’s moving forward. Having a project in a popular neighborhood cut nearly in half is bad for a city that desperately needs more residents. The project moving forward is better than not getting it at all. 

Today's microunit is tomorrow's tenement slum.

 

'Glad it was was reduced in scale. One single multifamily residential structure should not be designed to make up for the macro-scale shortcomings of the wider region.  

 

The continued high demand in this community will bring focus & development to other empty city lots. Hopefully they also won't be way out of scale for their neighborhoods and if so their designs will get cut down too, to long-term sustainable size. 

Edited May 28, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy

It looks like they did make some improvements from the previous rendering, so that’s good. This is the render that was posted with the article on CLE dot com (which is subscriber exclusive). I’d still prefer the original design, but this does look much better than the previous scaled-down version. 

 

 

Here was the last design:

 

“Today's microunit is tomorrow's tenement slum.” is a staggeringly bad take, especially in the context of posting on “Urban” Ohio. 
 

Micro apartments are the best way for a person to live in a desirable neighborhood in a nicely furnished placed at a reasonable cost. Every growing neighborhood with good transit and good public spaces should have as many micro units as possible. “Scaling them down” makes them more expensive to build (per unit), which partially undermines the point. We need to scale them up. 

This project has exactly 0 of the characteristics that have historically created slums. The surrounding area is too diverse and high income.

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

It looks like they did make some improvements from the previous rendering, so that’s good. This is the render that was posted with the article on CLE dot com (which is subscriber exclusive). I’d still prefer the original design, but this does look much better than the previous scaled-down version. 

 

 

Here was the last design:

 

 

Good catch.  At least the final design looks a bit more refined and aesthetically-pleasing. 

Regarding the micro-unit market, consider this paragraph I had in my article about Signet's new Cleveland development, in the 7200 block between Euclid and Carnegie....

 

Its most recent housing project in Cleveland is the Axis at Ansel. Opening this nearly a year ago, the $35 million, 163-unit apartment building with more than 1,000 square feet of street-facing retail is located at the corner of Ansel Road and Hough Avenue. A retail tenant is Fawaky Burst smoothies. The market-rate apartments are 93 percent leased and there are waiting lists for studio and one-bedroom apartments.

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/05/24/millionaires-row-mansion-down-to-the-11th-hour/

 

And, a broader statement about the UC development scene, consider this summary of large projects recently underway or due to see groundbreakings in the next year....

 

By this time next year and within a few blocks of East 105th, between the Veterans Administration Hospital and East 105th/Quincy Red Line station, construction should be under way on the following major projects of 100,000 square feet or more among all phases:

 

+ Artisan –10600 Chester Ave., 24-story, 342,805-square-foot apartment tower over structured parking and ground-floor retail, White Oak Realty Partners; construction began in April 2021.
+ Addis View Apartments — 1870 E. 90th St., a four-phase development totaling 400 apartments on both sides of East 90th started with a 93,000-square-foot, 141-unit first phase, The Inspiron Group; construction began May 3, 2021.

+ Innovation Square — 2258 E. 105th St., a three-phase mixed-use development totaling 223 housing units starting with an 80,000-square-foot, 85-unit first phase, Fairfax Renaissance Development Corp.; groundbreaking is due spring 2021.

+ ARPI Apartments — 1866 E. 93rd St., a two-phase development expanding over to East 90th Street totaling 160 units but starting with 42 apartments and 40,000 square feet in phase one, ARPI Development LLC; groundbreaking due in early summer 2021.

+ Library Lofts/MLK Branch Library — 10541 Euclid Ave., an 11-story, 184,000-square-foot apartment tower over public library, Midwest Development Partners; groundbreaking due in August 2021.

+ Cedar-105 mixed-use development — 10408 Cedar Ave., a 5-10 story, roughly 150,000-square-foot development with 250-300 micro-unit apartments and urban-format Meijer grocery store, Fairmount Properties and Cleveland Clinic Foundation; groundbreaking possible in late 2021.

+ Cleveland Clinic new Neurological Institute — 9606 Euclid Ave., a 5-10 story, 400,000-plus-square-foot hospital building, Cleveland Clinic Foundation; groundbreaking possible in winter 2021-22.

+ Cleveland Clinic Cole Eye Institute expansion — 2030 E. 105th St., a 4-6 story, 100,000-square-foot hospital building, Cleveland Clinic Foundation; groundbreaking possible in winter 2021-22.

+ Global Center for Pathogen Research & Human Health — vicinity of Cedar Avenue and East 105th, a 5-10 story, 400,000 square feet office and research facility, Cleveland Clinic Foundation; groundbreaking possible in Spring 2022.

 

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/05/21/library-lofts-mlk-branch-library-to-amplify-ucs-boom/

Regarding UC microunits, to carry over a point raised in the Little Italy thread, average American household size is about the smallest it has ever been, having fallen from about 3.5 in 1960 (which was already lower than previous decades) to roughly 2.5 now. These micro-units aren't being marketed to families of seven. They're being marketed to active single people who live alone and have absolutely zero need for a 1000 sq. ft unit.

 

For about a year after my wife and I had our first child, we lived in a roughly 600 sq. ft. apartment. That's 200 sq. ft. per person for the math challenged.

 

On a separate note, I'm amazed by the pessimism of the folks upset by this development. From the article:

 

Quote

But Ambro worries the new building will not only change the fabric of the neighborhood but will dampen enthusiasm for the street fair, started in 1969 but which wasn’t held in 2020 or 2021.

“If this building is built, I don’t know if we’ll ever have another street fair,” Ambro said. “It may kill the enthusiasm. It will certainly eliminate the food court and the museum.”

 

I mean come on. By that reasoning, the Feast of the Assumption in Little Italy is in grave danger, because many parking lots have been filled with new development. The annual Fourth of July fireworks downtown are also in jeopardy if the parking lots north of FE are developed because then WHERE WILL PEOPLE PARK AND WATCH THE FIREWORKS??!

NIMBY's are usually by nature catastophists.  "THESE 12 UNITS ARE GOING TO DESTROY OUR ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD!" Is a pretty ridiculous thing to say if you think about it for even a moment, but par for the NIMBY course!

All of Maron's projects needed major rework before getting approved. It'd be nice if he paid for this kind of attention to detail without all the back and forth. The final revision is probably the most cohesive of his projects. The rest have ranged from bad to barely passable. Here are higher res versions of what was approved and original proposal:

 

 

 

I would’ve like the resident infusion of the larger sized project, but I actually think the 12 unit version is the better looking one and will “fit” into the neighborhood very effectively. 

 

Thanks for the updated shots. 👍👍👍   Nice looking place for twelve new families on this very cute yet vibrant human-scaled residential street.

I'm surprised how few people see this as a total win that it is. I love it for the size and contextual cohesiveness within the historic fabric of the neighborhood. 

 

IMO there's still lots of room in U.C. for towers of everyone's favorite tiny apartments. They can stand tall among the prairies of ravaged low-density neighborhoods surrounding them. The answer to affordable housing is not to create an unnecessary imbalance of wastelands in one place, but everyone crammed together in another. 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 20214 yr by ExPatClevGuy