February 12, 20214 yr ^ Thanks for sharing. Hopefully the designs aren't final and some of the earlier multi path concepts can still be incorporated.
February 12, 20214 yr Cool! "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 17, 20214 yr Old vs New plans for Karam: See more info here: https://courbanize.com/projects/karamseniorliving/information
February 17, 20214 yr Were these changes made after a neighborhood meeting? Interesting that the updated design would include so much lime green and (what looks like) vinyl siding. I prefer the original design, and if I didn't know any better, I would have thought the two plans were flipped.
February 17, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, tykaps said: Old vs New plans for Karam: See more info here: https://courbanize.com/projects/karamseniorliving/information “OK, keep the basic premise, but do everything you can to make it uglier.” was apparently their takeaway from the community input. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
February 24, 20214 yr My wife sends... NIMBYs protesting outside of the illustrious, historical, vibrant, pedestrian-welcoming, and very much still in use Club Azteca to stop it from being torn down and replaced by v lame, ugly, cheap development. i hope you all can sense my sarcasm because I’m laying it on pretty thick
February 24, 20214 yr 3 minutes ago, Cleburger said: What is Club Azteca? Honestly I don't think I've ever noticed it before. I walk past there 5-6x a week and I’ve never once seen the door ajar.
February 24, 20214 yr We must protect a vacant building which is more important than new homes for actual people.
February 24, 20214 yr From what she was able to hear, my wife said the lady on the loud speaker was talking about the evils of gentrification.
February 24, 20214 yr County Land Bank owns it.. so from what I can gather the building was probably vacant and the owners were not paying taxes. Where was this group to help save the building from being acquired by the land bank? Maybe the protestors should be asking why the azteca club let the building become useless and behind on taxes, not why a developer is making the property useful again.
February 24, 20214 yr Of the two buildings why would you pick that one to save and not the one next door.
February 24, 20214 yr 57 minutes ago, YABO713 said: From what she was able to hear, my wife said the lady on the loud speaker was talking about the evils of gentrification. For most development around Cleveland, objections based on gentrification = acceptable term for saying we don't want new people to move into the neighborhood. The real reason for people being upset is pretty apparent when the thing that they are trying to protect is a vacant building.
February 24, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, jz15 said: County Land Bank owns it.. so from what I can gather the building was probably vacant and the owners were not paying taxes. Where was this group to help save the building from being acquired by the land bank? Maybe the protestors should be asking why the azteca club let the building become useless and behind on taxes, not why a developer is making the property useful again. BUT WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO DISCOTECA?
February 24, 20214 yr 18 minutes ago, YABO713 said: BUT WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO DISCOTECA? Clark-Fulton, obv...
February 24, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, YABO713 said: My wife sends... NIMBYs protesting outside of the illustrious, historical, vibrant, pedestrian-welcoming, and very much still in use Club Azteca to stop it from being torn down and replaced by v lame, ugly, cheap development. i hope you all can sense my sarcasm because I’m laying it on pretty thick There was a tweet on this yesterday saying "Club Azteca is one of the few, if not only remaining historic landmarks representing the arrival of Mexican Immigrants in Cleveland 100 years ago" There is no way in hell that building is 100 years old lol!!!
February 24, 20214 yr 8 minutes ago, mack34 said: There was a tweet on this yesterday saying "Club Azteca is one of the few, if not only remaining historic landmarks representing the arrival of Mexican Immigrants in Cleveland 100 years ago" There is no way in hell that building is 100 years old lol!!! The building itself was built in 1900. The club wasn't acquired by Club Azteca until 1951 and officially opened in 1957. It was foreclosed on due to unpaid taxes and acquired by the landbank in December of 2020. https://case.edu/ech/articles/c/club-azteca
February 24, 20214 yr Here was the WKYC report. https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/community/community-rallies-prevent-demolition-cleveland-club-azteca-building/95-802c74bb-d19f-4f79-a25e-3fb79443d6b7
February 24, 20214 yr 40 minutes ago, Old Not Obsolete said: Here was the WKYC report. https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/community/community-rallies-prevent-demolition-cleveland-club-azteca-building/95-802c74bb-d19f-4f79-a25e-3fb79443d6b7 I am trying not to be insensitive... But they've had over a decade to save this building, and it just sat vacant
February 24, 20214 yr I could be reading this wrong but after watching the WKYC video, it kind of sounded like they may just want the significance of the establishment acknowledged. Which that part is understandable to me, however saving the structure itself isn't (unless im missing something and there is some ornate detail under the stucco and vinyl siding). Maybe the developer can do something thoughtful, like a plaque or naming arrangement or re-use of the existing signage currently on the front of the building?
February 24, 20214 yr 30 minutes ago, viscomi said: I could be reading this wrong but after watching the WKYC video, it kind of sounded like they may just want the significance of the establishment acknowledged. Which that part is understandable to me, however saving the structure itself isn't (unless im missing something and there is some ornate detail under the stucco and vinyl siding). Maybe the developer can do something thoughtful, like a plaque or naming arrangement or re-use of the existing signage currently on the front of the building? Who knows what is actually happening in the conversations, but at least according to coUrbanize they have been considering things like that: https://courbanize.com/projects/wandoak-/information "The southwest corner of the site consists of the now-vacant former Club Azteca building. Bond Street and former Club Azteca stakeholders engaged in many conversations over the past many months largely focused on how the legacy and history of the Club may be honored and acknowledged in the new project. The Club Azteca stakeholders will continue to play a role and further develop those ideas. We happily welcome community feedback on the matter as well!"
February 24, 20214 yr There is nothing architecturally significant about this building. They dont have to save the structure to honor the cultural significance of the location.
February 25, 20214 yr Indeed. The developers are already working with members of Club Azteca to memorialize the site. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 25, 20214 yr Does anyone know what they are doing in the building across from the Parkview? It looks like new windows have gone in and a renovation is taking place.
February 25, 20214 yr 8 hours ago, CleWestSide said: Does anyone know what they are doing in the building across from the Parkview? It looks like new windows have gone in and a renovation is taking place. It's being turned into a storage facility.
February 25, 20214 yr Waverly & Oak concept was resoundingly rebuffed by Landmarks Commission. Too large, not respecting the history of the site plan and tabled for a later date. Edited February 25, 20214 yr by downtownjoe
February 25, 20214 yr Is there a way to contact these city officials and tell them to stop being idiots?
February 25, 20214 yr I confused by the "tabling". Wasn't this just a conceptual presentation with no vote planned at this time. In other words, didn't they have to come back to Landmark anyway for a vote?
February 25, 20214 yr 16 minutes ago, JB said: Is there a way to contact these city officials and tell them to stop being idiots? Yes, everyone should send emails: http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/contact/department?code=99
February 25, 20214 yr So what is the process on this building now? Do they need to come back to Landmarks with a different design before they can go ahead?
February 25, 20214 yr Does anyone know if the council person has expressed an opinion on the development as it stands now? If he is against it in its current form it is clearly dead. Landmark rarely if ever goes against the wishes of the council person. That said, support does not necessary mean an eventual affirmative vote.
February 25, 20214 yr On 2/25/2021 at 5:03 PM, Htsguy said: Does anyone know if the council person has expressed an opinion on the development as it stands now? If he is against it in its current form it is clearly dead. Landmark rarely if ever goes against the wishes of the council person. That said, support does not necessary mean an eventual affirmative vote. Jenny Spencer was in favor of today's decision to table it. I don't have a sense how she feels behind closed doors though. I know folks have been pounding her email hard to get her on board with going against it. We'll see. Edited March 5, 20214 yr by Clefan98
February 25, 20214 yr People should blow up her email in support of the project. Nimbys are merely using Club Azteca to stop "gentrification." Most of them do not care about that building.
February 25, 20214 yr Would they have to seek a variance for the height? If yes how far are they over with the current design?
February 25, 20214 yr 33 minutes ago, Htsguy said: Would they have to seek a variance for the height? If yes how far are they over with the current design? The whole site would need site specific legislation passed. The meeting is watchable for now here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5PMmcT3ceI The concept review starts at 1:46 (about 1 hour and 45 minutes of discussion). No action was ever going to be taken today as it was only a concept review. The developers are to take that feedback and see what they can do before returning for final approval. So it wasn't tabled or turned down, it was just reviewed and suggestions were made for consideration.
February 25, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, Clefan98 said: She is in favor of today's decision to table it. I don't have a sense how she feels behind closed doors though. I know folks have been pounding her email hard to get her on board with going against it. We'll see. Is the new councilwoman who took over Matt Zone's ward, Jenny Spencer? WTF? Why would she be against it--publicly or privately? Its good for her district. She's up for election this November. Unless she can state a good reason, she should be booted out. I'll happily campaign for and fund her opponent.
February 25, 20214 yr 1 minute ago, Pugu said: Is the new councilwoman who took over Matt Zone's ward, Jenny Spencer? WTF? Why would she be against it--publicly or privately? Its good for her district. She's up for election this November. Unless she can state a good reason, she should be booted out. I'll happily campaign for and fund her opponent. Yep, it's Jenny Spencer, former DSDCO director. Every ward 15 member should email her...I've already done so.
February 26, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, Pugu said: Is the new councilwoman who took over Matt Zone's ward, Jenny Spencer? WTF? Why would she be against it--publicly or privately? Its good for her district. She's up for election this November. Unless she can state a good reason, she should be booted out. I'll happily campaign for and fund her opponent. The way all of the opponents in the meeting and protest phrased things, anyone who supports this development is evil and actively oppressing and destroying the history of the latinx community. While I wish she'd look at things logically and support this development that would really help her ward, it makes sense why she'd be hesitant to publicly support it.
February 26, 20214 yr 16 minutes ago, tykaps said: The way all of the opponents in the meeting and protest phrased things, anyone who supports this development is evil and actively oppressing and destroying the history of the latinx community. While I wish she'd look at things logically and support this development that would really help her ward, it makes sense why she'd be hesitant to publicly support it. Perhaps she's too weak for politics---she needs to explain to her constituents why this is a good thing for them. If she can't handle that, she needs to be voted out. This project is good for her ward and the city and if she is blocking it, she is bad for her constituents (even if they think otherwise), her ward, and the city. As a city, we are suffering too long with crappy leaders like Ken Johnson, this woman---and she's only been in office a few weeks, Mayor Jackson, etc. No excuses.
February 26, 20214 yr 12 hours ago, Pugu said: Perhaps she's too weak for politics---she needs to explain to her constituents why this is a good thing for them. If she can't handle that, she needs to be voted out. This project is good for her ward and the city and if she is blocking it, she is bad for her constituents (even if they think otherwise), her ward, and the city. As a city, we are suffering too long with crappy leaders like Ken Johnson, this woman---and she's only been in office a few weeks, Mayor Jackson, etc. No excuses. Here's Jenny's official statement...If I'm reading between the lines correctly, it appears she's in support of the project but can't flat out say it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HXkVSc-KPou37r9AH6oLgJqii5VJknN8bchUinTvPbo/edit?fbclid=IwAR0O6XWNJEYp62Hu5MwZMNYVK6fmbqaJXnLFqAlk2TrIO_hPwVY6Wv5GZ44
February 26, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, Clefan98 said: Here's Jenny's official statement...If I'm reading between the lines correctly, it appears she's in support of the project but can't flat out say it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HXkVSc-KPou37r9AH6oLgJqii5VJknN8bchUinTvPbo/edit?fbclid=IwAR0O6XWNJEYp62Hu5MwZMNYVK6fmbqaJXnLFqAlk2TrIO_hPwVY6Wv5GZ44 It's a pretty reasonable statement. Possible solution: the developer could offer Club Azteca members a one-year option to lease one of the storefronts for a new Club. Remember: It's the Year of the Snake
February 26, 20214 yr What is really infuriating to me is that Landmarks could potentially be really screwing over the Le family (who have invested in this neighborhood for years and taken risks when it was not hot) because they think the building is too tall (I think the parties can resolve the club issues and are working on it) which it is not. Staff at planning really have to start lobbying these idiots.
February 26, 20214 yr If height is the actual issue that kills this development (the club issue is resolved but the developer determines that it does not make economic sense shorter, with less units) we should all freak out. I might be wrong about this but I think city council can remove a parcel's Landmark designation. This apparently is rarely done but I would have no problem with that here (it is also becoming more and more evident that Landmarks, as currently comprised, has too much power and focuses too much on certain design issues which are better handled by design review). While a possibility I don't think removal would happen. The council person, while maybe in favor of the project, clearly does not favor it to the extent that she would put up a big fight and take such a drastic action and alienate even a few voters. She is too new and reading her statement, very cautious. Moreover she would have to convince her fellow council members and while they don't have a direct interest, there is probably a reluctance to set such a precedent, even though it has happen a couple of times. After all Landmark designation throughout the city is there for a reason and a very good one.
February 26, 20214 yr Issues with the club aside, the comments about height and the plan not being appropriate for the site are infuriating. If its not ok to build densely along Detroit, next door to an existing four story building, I wonder where Landmarks does believe such a building would be appropriate. As said above, it will be Landmarks that kills this project, not any disputes with the developers and the Club.
February 26, 20214 yr ^^I could be wrong, but I'm guessing Landmarks is involved because the site is in the Gordon Square historic district, not because any individual parcel is designated. The best solution for the social club, IMHO, and evidence that the concern is good faith, is leveraging the publicity to resuscitate the club and relocation of the facade to a new facility that isn't a wreck. Personally, I have always loved the facade, and would happily chip in some money.
February 26, 20214 yr ^That is correct (it is in GS Historic District) but as I understand it a parcel in a district can be severed and lose its protection with a vote of council Again rare but I think that is what happened around the Variety Theater because the council person wanted the development to happen. Edited February 26, 20214 yr by Htsguy
February 26, 20214 yr 16 hours ago, Pugu said: 16 hours ago, tykaps said: that would really help her ward, it makes sense why she'd be hesitant to publicly support it. Perhaps she's too weak for politics---she needs to explain to her constituents why this is a good thing for them. If she can't handle that, she needs to be voted out. This project is good for her ward and the city and if she is blocking it, she is bad for her constituents (even if they think otherwise), her ward, and the city. As a city, we are suffering too long with crappy leaders like Ken Johnson, this woman---and she's only been in office a few weeks, Mayor Jackson, etc. N Jenny is hands down one of the best council people. Her statement is pretty tactical and well thought out and the amount of resident engagement she's already facilitating at the neighborhood level around other topics is very admirable. Advocating for her to simply disregard all of the opposition (regardless of whether we think it's legitimate or not) completely disregards the current power structure in Ward 15, both in terms of influential resident stakeholders, the CDC board, etc. As has been mentioned above, the objections to massing and the design itself are really bizarre. As far as I can tell, nearly no one has actually complained about the size of the development. Landmarks just sort of brought that up on their own, for some reason. Edited February 26, 20214 yr by jws
February 26, 20214 yr On 2/24/2021 at 11:14 AM, Cleburger said: What is Club Azteca? Honestly I don't think I've ever noticed it before. Historic club's proposed demolition delayed as developer promises continued dialogue (news5cleveland.com) www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/historic-clubs-proposed-demolition-delayed-as-developer-promises-continued-dialogue it's a monkey wrench in cogs spinning towards progress - that's ultimately what it is. Look at these photos posted in the article. Holy cow. You're talking several ten's of thousands of dollars of work. For a defunct club that hasn't been open in ages. :| The Dia de Los Muertos festival in Gordon square is very well done and fun but not ONCE has anybody brought up saving this club UNTIL NOW........ (i am of Mexican decent and I have to admit besides driving by this club and thinking, "what a dump", I've never regarded this as anything). The level of "i just can't" with the fawning people suddenly want to do over this building is up to *here* (hand over my head). Edited February 26, 20214 yr by fuel1411
Create an account or sign in to comment