Open question.

Open question.

 

Answer:  Search this forum for the thread already dedicated to this subject.

Somehow you found the only possible non-answer to an open question. 

327, maybe you can try being more specific? I'm assuming this is a continuation of the discussion in the General Business thread, and I'm assuming this is a question posed to the city's socio-economic ills?

Somehow you found the only possible non-answer to an open question. 

 

this thread is exactly what you're thread will be about

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,9495.0.html

 

Here are other threads

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3920.0.html

Not exactly Cleveland Centric, but you get the point

 

Lastly, if you do a search for Cleveland in the Business, City Discussion or Urban bar forums, almost any of the topics in those forums would qualify to be discussed here.  Is there a real need to duplicate places when you specifically say "this is an open question". 

 

All you're doing is making an Cleveland specific urbanbar which MayDay, the Mayor, KJP, 3231 and X will have to babysit.

 

IIRC, there is a thread asking us to discuss how we would change, improve or do to improve our cities.

327, maybe you can try being more specific? I'm assuming this is a continuation of the discussion in the General Business thread, and I'm assuming this is a question posed to the city's socio-economic ills?

 

If fixing socio-economic ills is what you would do, then yes that's what it's about.  If you think they don't sell enough ice cream or ferrets around here, this would be the place to take your stand. 

 

Beyond that... it's meta.  If you have a point to make about relationships between several projects at once, when each has it's own thread, maybe try this.  If a development story opens up a theoretical quandry, this thread can keep the news thread clean.

 

I like the way the forum is run in general.  To the extent that I might see this or that differently, I would prefer to engineer a work-around rather than to debate or ignore the rules. 

 

This particular experiment is not off to a rousing start...  I was just hoping to hear more ideas like the ones from the General Business thread earlier today, and the Rockometer thread.  Each opinion on the Rockometer is based on a set of assumptions and goals that are worth exploring individually.  Or not.  It's not always apparent until the middle of the discussion.     

 

All you're doing is making an Cleveland specific urbanbar which MayDay, the Mayor, KJP, 3231 and X will have to babysit.

 

 

Actually I was hoping to reduce the need for babysitting in other threads.  I'm not the only one who goes off topic.  Topic boundaries aren't always clear, and even though the topics are helpful 98% of the time, they're occasionally cumbersome.  I've seen other times that news threads begat separate discussion threads, so it's not exactly unprecedented. 

 

To differentiate this from the examples you posted, in no way is it intended for venting sans solutions.  Many solutions can develop from venting, but the idea is to focus on the solutions here and keep the venting to a necessary minimum.  The other one as you said wasn't city specific-- a problem-- and was also focused more on problems than solutions. 

 

This thread asks for solutions even if you don't see any specific problems that call for them.  Maybe it's just an idea you think would help the community and ought to be given a try.   

http://clevelandideas.com/

As far as ice cream goes, we need a Honey Hut on the east side.  There's a solution! :)

I would make driving on the left and passing on the right punishable by death.

I would make granite curbs mandatory on all road and bridge rebuilding projects for the long term cost savings. They last for decades and rarely crack when run over by a bus or truck. Oh, and they look better than formed concrete.

clevelandideas.com = Lame.  Go look if you don't believe me. 

 

clevlelandidea #2 is to "tear down empty buildings and replace with green space" while #3 is titled "use the darn lake."  I like the prominence of their no-bashing provision, but otherwise it looks like kindergarten compared to UO.  I was hoping to get ideas that are a bit more educated and thought out.  The joke ideas here are better than many of their serious ones.

Add some goddamn color to the landscape.  6 months of bleak gray skies means almost nothing should be painted gray or silver.  I think RTA blew it with the new shelters and vehicle color scheme.

Oh, and since I have not yet said it this calendar year: unify the quadrants of public square into a single kick-ass public park for downtown residents and workers and dump tons of money into it to maintain it and tastefully program it.  Public Square is an embrassment not only for the way it functions now but because of the wasted opportunity.

 

And similarly...don't let ODOT make any decisions about anything.  Stop designing the city's roadway network to accommodate the 60 busiest minutes of the day...we should be thinking about the other 1380 minutes in each day too.

Oh, and since I have not yet said it this calendar year: unify the quadrants of public square into a single kick-ass public park for downtown residents and workers and dump tons of money into it to maintain it and tastefully program it. Public Square is an embrassment not only for the way it functions now but because of the wasted opportunity.

 

And similarly...don't let ODOT make any decisions about anything. Stop designing the city's roadway network to accommodate the 60 busiest minutes of the day...we should be thinking about the other 1380 minutes in each day too.

 

Could not agree more...

I actually like this thread.  It should be used as an overflow for discussions that get somewhat off-topic, but are still somewhat on-topic (see Parkview renovation).

 

Not sure of the shelf life, though.  I will have to remember it when the axe is looming. 

 

 

I also am not a fan of the housing choice voucher program.  I think it has miserably failed.  All it has done is spread out the ills of poverty, as opposed to correcting them.  It is infecting inner ring suburbs, and making their middle class residents, both black and white, flee. 

 

Past 7 years, the number of voucher recipients in Lakewood, G Heights, C Heights, and Euclid have doubled.  They are pushing these communities, with the exception of Lakewood, dangerously close to their poverty thresholds. 

 

1990-2000: poverty rate and violent crime rate in Cleveland went way down.

1990-2000: poverty rate and violent crime rate of Cle Hts, G Hts, Euclid, and Lakewood all went up

 

2007: Out of Cle Hts 800 Voucher recipients, 168 were arrested.  On Derbyshire bw Cottage Grove and Lee, severe clustering of voucher recipients occurred and...guess what?  A gang in Cleveland Hts, the G-Squares.  The Housing Choice Voucher Program at work. 

 

What sense does it make to spread around poverty?  Do you people really think that by living in Cle Hts/Shaker Hts, the light switch is going to turn on and things will change?  I wish that were the case, but I disagree.

 

What's worse?  These cities have no control in stemming the flow of voucher recipients into their communities, thus pushing them closer and closer to their poverty thresholds. 

 

Plus, is Outwaithe and E.55 really going to turn around bc we are knocking down public housing units?  Will the mixed income units really last?  I would say no and no. 

 

Anyways, I think my diatribe should elicit some thoughtful responses.

I agree that the program as it is isn't really working.  But I don't think you have given any solutions.  I disagree that we should concentrate poverty as you previously suggested in a post that was deleted.  I think we should just be tougher on enforcing rules on the renters.  Break the law and you're out.  There are plenty of Section 8 renters that help fill out the rental market in suburbs and are appreciative of the opportunity to live where they wish and are good neighbors.  Why cluster these people back into high-crime projects just because they're poor?  The real solution is to enforce the law tougher to get the criminals off the street.  There are plenty of law-abiding citizens in poverty.

I would do anything that builds stronger foundations for Cleveland's future. I don't think new construction developments are necessarily the key, in and of themselves. Not necessarily in this order, in terms of importance:

 

1. I would love to invest as much as possible into mass transit, and into the transportation network, period. Build better access by various modes of transportation: water, roads, rails. Get Cleveland to become a truly walkable city. Not necessarily get RID of the automobile, because it's necessary and it's more convenient. But give Clevelanders a much better chance at getting around without needing a car. Pedestrian activity gives a city a greater sense of energy, vitality, security, etc, and I think that in itself would help make it more attractive.

 

2. Anything that I could do to help people get a better education would be high on my list. That would include children to adults. Get adults on the same page as what's needed for the workforce of today .. and the future, and get them off of welfare, etc, if they're on it. I think inspiring people to DREAM BIG, and that they can fulfill those dreams is huge. This might even involve social outreach programs to really, proactively reach out to communities that are down on their luck and without hope. Instead of investing so much in welfare and band-aid solutions like that, get people off of their asses and make something of themselves and get them out of their bondage to poverty. Try and figure out a way to provide this help as low-cost as possible. Provide more scholarships for students who are really doing well and really want to further their education after high school. Show them that hard work is rewarded hugely and that there are benefits to hard work.

 

3. Attract businesses to the region by showing them that Cleveland is a competitive place to do business. Don't tax the crap out of them and keep them away, make government smaller and more efficient, and work AS A REGION to draw companies to the region's fantastic assets. And Cleveland has some HUGE benefits to it, regionally speaking. There are fantastic universities here, the NASA center, the proposed aerotropolis, the manufacturing base, the strong arts community  .. all of these things are good, and can put it at quite an advantage over other places.

 

4. And this one goes with #3: continue to invest in industries that are building to the city's and the nation's future. Green industries, bio-medical, aeronautical/space .. these are all things that are already established here. I would build on those things and really promote them and make Cleveland a leader in certain areas. I think it's still mostly known as a manufacturing center, and it'll take time to change that perception. Also, tie in education with industries that are already established here. Help people get the training they need to become successful right in the city and not go elsewhere. The two very much go hand in hand. You can educate the people, but if you don't have the jobs, they'll go elsewhere, and vice versa.

 

All of this stuff takes a lot of work. It takes strong leadership. But hard work is what's needed. Progress is hard work. Change is hard work. Success is hard work. It will only come with hard work. But the rewards, I believe, can be huge.

Ask those who have left, why?  And what can be done to get them to move back and not just flap off at the gums.

Ask those who have left, why? And what can be done to get them to move back and not just flap off at the gums.

 

I've already answered this question many times, but you're too thick-headed to listen, so I'm not wasting another breath on you.

 

The day that you quit your position in NYC and fully commit to living and working in Cleveland is the day that I'll move back.

I agree that the program as it is isn't really working.  But I don't think you have given any solutions.  I disagree that we should concentrate poverty as you previously suggested in a post that was deleted.  I think we should just be tougher on enforcing rules on the renters.  Break the law and you're out.  There are plenty of Section 8 renters that help fill out the rental market in suburbs and are appreciative of the opportunity to live where they wish and are good neighbors.  Why cluster these people back into high-crime projects just because they're poor?  The real solution is to enforce the law tougher to get the criminals off the street.  There are plenty of law-abiding citizens in poverty.

 

I would hesitate to kick people out of section 8 completely, because then what?  We don't want them all living at bus stops and we can't fit them all in jail.  I would also differentiate between Outhwaite and downtown.  The latter instance really cries out for an end to the clustering, as does Ohio City. 

 

Outhwaite is such a large cluster I'm not sure what can be done with it.  Cleveland has very few hi-rise projects, instead they're built in quasi-suburban fashion and take up large sections of the city.  Maybe one way to cluster more effctively is to make it more vertical.  Does that solve much?  No.  But it would reduce the sheer land area occupied by projects, which would open up a near-equal amount of land area to some other type of development.

 

On the other hand, I've heard nothing but bad about hi-rise project living.  For one thing they're probably harder to police.  Plus CMHA tends to put singles in the hi-rises, which means not families, which probably leads to additional crime.   

 

 

Ask those who have left, why?  And what can be done to get them to move back and not just flap off at the gums.

 

I've already answered this question many times, but you're too thick-headed to listen, so I'm not wasting another breath on you.

 

The day that you quit your position in NYC and fully commit to living and working in Cleveland is the day that I'll move back.

 

You can't possibly believe my comment was about or related to you?  ::)

will i be heckled too hard if i say i really like a lot of current plans? those being feb plans, the port authority move and consolidation, the renovation and expansion of the current convention center, towpath trail, long-term airport plans, all the renos downtown, stuff going on all around univ circle, etc.

 

it's just that everything moves at a snail's pace, i wish it could all happen much, much quicker!

 

Add some goddamn color to the landscape.  6 months of bleak gray skies means almost nothing should be painted gray or silver.  I think RTA blew it with the new shelters and vehicle color scheme.

 

ha. i disagree. bring on even more silver and gray structures. you can't fight the skies, but you can rock them.  :banger:  gray sky is a local natural resource so i say continue to go with it. you can always break it up with temporary lighting and projections now and then...you just can't hope to defeat it!  :laugh:

 

You can't possibly believe my comment was about or related to you? ::)

 

No. Mine wasn't related to you, either.

mrnyc I like those plans too, all of them.  I'm less enamored with the Towpath Trail, but I still like the idea.  It just fits into my category of "let's do that later, after we've rebuilt some neighborhoods and restored downtown."  But it's a cool idea, as is the entire trail network city hall currently envisions.  And the concept of showing movies on the clouds is mind-blowing.  Can't happen though... I'm sure the FAA or someone wouldn't like it, even if it were physically possible.  Is it?

I agree that the program as it is isn't really working.  But I don't think you have given any solutions.  I disagree that we should concentrate poverty as you previously suggested in a post that was deleted.  I think we should just be tougher on enforcing rules on the renters.  Break the law and you're out.  There are plenty of Section 8 renters that help fill out the rental market in suburbs and are appreciative of the opportunity to live where they wish and are good neighbors.  Why cluster these people back into high-crime projects just because they're poor?  The real solution is to enforce the law tougher to get the criminals off the street.  There are plenty of law-abiding citizens in poverty.

 

Just bc I don't have the silver bullet means we should continue with a policy that isn't working.

 

327, I am not saying these people should be homeless.  I'm just saying that maybe they should put the public housing units were they originally were.  And yes, that does equal concentration.

 

But what I do not get is the argument about "forcing these people to live in such deplorable neighborhoods."  I think that argument takes the wrong position into thinking that it is the air in the neighborhood that makes the neighborhoods terrible.  That isn't the case.  The problem is that the culture of these poor people is incredibly backwards and prevents them from every making it out (ok, like 1% does).  I guess I am curious who is responsbile for the horrific conditions of these neighborhoods?  Not the people?

 

But I do agree about a lot of voucher recipients per se not being the ones who cause problems.  However, the problem often stems from their boyfriends, baby daddys, or sons.  A majority of the voucher recipients are female (like 65%), and we know females do not commit a majority of crimes. 

 

My plan? 

 

Halt the voucher program until an evaluation of the impact the program is having on the receiving communities

 

Allow the receiving communities to put a cap on the number of recipients they can take

 

A one strike and you're out rule.  Currently, these people will only get removed if there are like major drug deals or crazy violence.  If the cops get called 100x for nuisance, they generally stay.

 

For inner ring suburbs that already have over 10% poverty rate, prevent recipients from living there

 

Landlords need to held more accountable

 

HUD $$ needs to go to communities like Cle Hts so that the city does not have to spend their own money on "how to live in Suburbia" training days.

 

$$ for increased police, too.

 

 

I'm totally not saying there is an easy solution.  I'm just saying that I think no study has been done on the impact of the IRSs.  Any prudent policy maker evaluates the OVERALL impact of their program, not just its impact on one segment (here, the recipients). 

I would do anything that builds stronger foundations for Cleveland's future. I don't think new construction developments are necessarily the key, in and of themselves. Not necessarily in this order, in terms of importance:

 

1. I would love to invest as much as possible into mass transit, and into the transportation network, period. Build better access by various modes of transportation: water, roads, rails. Get Cleveland to become a truly walkable city. Not necessarily get RID of the automobile, because it's necessary and it's more convenient. But give Clevelanders a much better chance at getting around without needing a car. Pedestrian activity gives a city a greater sense of energy, vitality, security, etc, and I think that in itself would help make it more attractive.

 

2. Anything that I could do to help people get a better education would be high on my list. That would include children to adults. Get adults on the same page as what's needed for the workforce of today .. and the future, and get them off of welfare, etc, if they're on it. I think inspiring people to DREAM BIG, and that they can fulfill those dreams is huge. This might even involve social outreach programs to really, proactively reach out to communities that are down on their luck and without hope. Instead of investing so much in welfare and band-aid solutions like that, get people off of their asses and make something of themselves and get them out of their bondage to poverty. Try and figure out a way to provide this help as low-cost as possible. Provide more scholarships for students who are really doing well and really want to further their education after high school. Show them that hard work is rewarded hugely and that there are benefits to hard work.

 

3. Attract businesses to the region by showing them that Cleveland is a competitive place to do business. Don't tax the crap out of them and keep them away, make government smaller and more efficient, and work AS A REGION to draw companies to the region's fantastic assets. And Cleveland has some HUGE benefits to it, regionally speaking. There are fantastic universities here, the NASA center, the proposed aerotropolis, the manufacturing base, the strong arts community  .. all of these things are good, and can put it at quite an advantage over other places.

 

4. And this one goes with #3: continue to invest in industries that are building to the city's and the nation's future. Green industries, bio-medical, aeronautical/space .. these are all things that are already established here. I would build on those things and really promote them and make Cleveland a leader in certain areas. I think it's still mostly known as a manufacturing center, and it'll take time to change that perception. Also, tie in education with industries that are already established here. Help people get the training they need to become successful right in the city and not go elsewhere. The two very much go hand in hand. You can educate the people, but if you don't have the jobs, they'll go elsewhere, and vice versa.

 

All of this stuff takes a lot of work. It takes strong leadership. But hard work is what's needed. Progress is hard work. Change is hard work. Success is hard work. It will only come with hard work. But the rewards, I believe, can be huge.

 

 

All are good ideas, especially 2,3, and 4. 

 

Which brings me to education.  These kids going to CSMD (at least a huge majority) are not getting an education.  While the CMSD says there graduation rates are like 61%, I have heard the real number is like 41% (I forget why CMSD's "official" number is way off). 

 

I have volunteered at South for a year and Glenville for a year, and the lack of education these kids have is mind-boggling.  What is sadder, is that a lot of them do not give a damn. 

 

However, I do not blame these kids at all.  They were born into horrific situations, and are surrounded by negative influences that rarely put a precedence on getting a good education.  With that being said, here is my suggestion:

 

Create a sort of super orphanage for these kids from the time they are born.  Allow the parent visitation rights whenver they want, but surround these kids with superman-esque role models.  These supermen will be responsible for teaching the kids the importance of education and being a good citizen, and will be a 24/7 support system.  The kids should stay there until they have finished high school. 

 

A very expensive, and probably illegal program.  But if you're going to really try and break this cycle of poverty, full blown intervention is necessary.  This is another of my problems with section 8.  Yes, these kids are not living in high poverty hoods anymore, but they are still being raised without a father and often incapable mother.  Plus, where clustering occurs, they are befriending kids from the same culture.

 

 

However, I do not blame these kids at all.  They were born into horrific situations, and are surrounded by negative influences that rarely put a precedence on getting a good education.  With that being said, here is my suggestion:

 

Create a sort of super orphanage for these kids from the time they are born.  Allow the parent visitation rights whenver they want, but surround these kids with superman-esque role models.  These supermen will be responsible for teaching the kids the importance of education and being a good citizen, and will be a 24/7 support system.  The kids should stay there until they have finished high school. 

 

A very expensive, and probably illegal program.  But if you're going to really try and break this cycle of poverty, full blown intervention is necessary.  This is another of my problems with section 8.  Yes, these kids are not living in high poverty hoods anymore, but they are still being raised without a father and often incapable mother.  Plus, where clustering occurs, they are befriending kids from the same culture.

 

PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE HAVING CHILDREN.

 

Not to beat this line of discussion into the ground because it is a bit off-topic, but I honestly think that welfare and programs along those lines do more harm than good. Let them have children, and then let these irresponsible parents starve themselves and their children to death. I mean that. Or let them go to prison for stealing things because now they don't have money, and they've made irresponsible decisions that they now blame EVERYONE ELSE for and expect EVERYONE ELSE to cover for them.

 

STOP HAVING CHILDREN, POOR PEOPLE!!! I really think that we as a society need to stop pandering to these social ills so much. Obviously this isn't the case for every family out there. There are good people who are in temporary bad circumstances who genuinely need welfare for a TEMPORARY period of time. But there's way too much abuse out there, and there's way too much shifting of blame out there, and not enough people taking responsibility for their own lives. And I think, honestly, sometimes people need to be FORCED to take responsibility of their own lives. If they choose not to, that's THEIR CHOICE. I know this sounds heartless and cruel, but I'm sick of the bullsh!t already, and I'm sick of these broken "families".

^^ Well to make it a little more realistic, maybe we should consider boarding schools. Put the kids up in a supervised environment and just send them home for the weekends. They'd have time to do homework and learn how to act responsibly from adults, but still get to see their families for a couple days each week.

There are plenty of middle class and rich people who shouldn't have children either!

 

There are plenty of people period, that should reproduce children.

That's true. But I think this issue of poverty leads to many greater problems and becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.

Places like Little Italy, Tremont, and now many districts in downtown WILL NOT permit shit to be built at this point, because there are zoning restrictions in place, but more importantly, there are committed residents in each of the said parts of town who will not let shit pop up. We will never see crap built in Little Italy because the community would throw out the idea or reject it. The same can be said in most suburbs, although, depending on which suburb you are talking about, what is considered "crap" is open to your own interpretation.

 

What Cleveland needs to do is stop letting crap get built in neighborhoods that are going to make a turnaround down the road. Let's take MidTown (my favorite example) and the pathetic Aldi's (I've used this argument at least a million times). If that or even worse, the new CVS on E. 79th and Euclid was never built, we would actually be better off with nothing, because that particular area has so much damn potential. The re-location of the Playhouse, the expansion of The Cleveland Clinic, the spin-off of Beacon Place, and all those beautfiul churches make this area an area that should be experiencing major growth. Instead, what we have is a cheap church that was built, a stupid pathetic and ugly Aldi's, a CVS that is setback from the intersection, and on the land of a former church, perhaps one of the best that ever set foot in Cleveland, and one damn ugly, poorly designed shopping plaza known as Church Square.

 

Meanwhile, 2 beatiful churches and the remaining clock tower on the third sit nearby, there are multiple (gorgeously designed) apartment complexes undergoing renovation, there is the Baker Motors project, and there is all this other (good) planned stuff that could truly ehance that part of MidTown. Now, assuming in 10 years, this is some sort of gentrified neighborhood for doctor's and surgeon's from the Clinic, OR WHOMEVER, and developers invest shitloads of money into the neighborhood, be it on new highrises, retail, or just Clinic expansion, we're going to be stuck with that damn awful CVS. That was an absolute prime corner and the most important in that area. Now, CVS and the setback will never go away, since it's on a 50 year lease. There's not much we can do to remove the Burger King, McDonald's, Rally's, and KFC either. Sadly. Stop them from being built whenever that was, would have been the solution.

 

What we need is to get in there and stop shit from being built in the neighborhoods of the future. There will never be a CVS setback from the road in Little Italy. And at that rate, we can say Little Italy and Tremont are intelligent and MidTown is not. So why then is it ok to build it in MidTown? We need to figure out who okays this stuff and why they do it. What would have happened if MidTown or the council for Fairfax said, "Hey you can build a CVS on 79th and Euclid, but it has to be designed for pedestrians on the Healthline, it has to include inititiatives for the neighborhood's future, and it has to be up on the sidewalk."

^ I enthusiastically agree.  I think this is one of the very first issues Cleveland must address before things can improve.  The poor decisions you listed off were so shockingly incompetent that several people should have been forced to resign in disgrace, never to hold a public position again.  We must start taking this stuff seriously.

2007: Out of Cle Hts 800 Voucher recipients, 168 were arrested.  On Derbyshire bw Cottage Grove and Lee, severe clustering of voucher recipients occurred and...guess what?  A gang in Cleveland Hts, the G-Squares.  The Housing Choice Voucher Program at work. 

 

Take it from a guy who grew up on the north side of Cleveland Hts... whatever this G-Squares clique is, it is hardly the first or one and only "gang" in Cleveland Hts.  We have had them for years.  At the HS, some were "called" fraternities, such as Nu-Fi (sp?), just to keep the admin off their back, but they met all the criteria of a gang.  Also, Folk, Black Stone, and other national gangs have been in the Hts for decades now.

 

 

2007: Out of Cle Hts 800 Voucher recipients, 168 were arrested.  On Derbyshire bw Cottage Grove and Lee, severe clustering of voucher recipients occurred and...guess what?  A gang in Cleveland Hts, the G-Squares.  The Housing Choice Voucher Program at work. 

 

Take it from a guy who grew up on the north side of Cleveland Hts... whatever this G-Squares clique is, it is hardly the first or one and only "gang" in Cleveland Hts.  We have had them for years.  At the HS, some were "called" fraternities, such as Nu-Fi (sp?), just to keep the admin off their back, but they met all the criteria of a gang.  Also, Folk, Black Stone, and other national gangs have been in the Hts for decades now.

 

As far as what I would do with the region and putting aside any legal considerations.  I would make it a requirement that any and all surburban developers who wish to put a housing development on undeveloped land to demolish or rehab, on a one-for-one basis, a boarded up house near the City's core.  A development near my current home called Cutter's Creek is a perfect example of this.  In my neighborhood, there is an overflow of dwellings for sale.  Then this company comes in and levels the wooded area on the corner of Green/Anderson to build cluster homes... in a neighborhood already over-saturated with for sale signs.  Not to mention they totally ruined the aesthetic value of several previously built homes that were built with having the wooded area as a backdrop in mind.  Now those homes have mounds of dirt to look at because the construction has been VERY slow.   

 

Agreed.  I would not limit that to just cleveland hts., they are know to stretch all the way to Mayfield, Kent and Ravenna.

^ ^^ I absolutely agree.  The decisions made in regards to businesses in the area seem to favor the wants and needs of current neighborhood residents, not the future doctors and professionals which will occupy the area.  So it is sort of a chicken-and-egg situation, and an interesting urban planning scenario.

 

How do you satisfy the current population's wants, while providing the land needed for future businesses which will cater to residents with higher incomes?  An interesting scenario.  Any thoughts?

^ ^^ I absolutely agree.  The decisions made in regards to businesses in the area seem to favor the wants and needs of current neighborhood residents, not the future doctors and professionals which will occupy the area.  So it is sort of a chicken-and-egg situation, and an interesting urban planning scenario.

 

How do you satisfy the current population's wants, while providing the land needed for future businesses which will cater to residents with higher incomes?  An interesting scenario.  Any thoughts?

 

I'm not sure I would break it down quite like that.  Current residents have no motivation, that I know of, to have ugly suburban garbage built there.  Current residents there are city residents and would probably be better off with city-style amenities, like an Aldi with doors facing the street.  I don't know what the constituency would be for building crap like they've built recently, other than inappropriately influential developers.  Actually I'm pretty sure that's who the constituency is:  inappropriately influential developers... foxes guarding the hen house of urban beauty.  If you build a decent grocery store space, it can upgrade from Aldi as the neighborhood gentrifies.  Instead we've build all kinds of stuff on Euclid that needs to come down forthwith, regardless of who lives there.

When we say "current residents" and "constituency", I think that it is important to remember that individuals alone have little time, gumption, or ability to effect the kind of change that keeps "crap" from being built or blight from taking place.  You really need an effective block club structure to keep folks vigilant and to provide the support structure needed to either create good new spaces or keep good neighborhoods from turning bad.

 

While I was being flippant in my earlier comment about driving on the left and passing on the right (granted, it still drives me to distraction), I am utterly earnest when I tell you that what I would do to improve Cleveland is to make sure that Block Clubs cover every square foot of the City.  Block Clubs help neighbors to know one another better, provide eyes on the street, make recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals that BOZA actually listens to, and advocates for one another.  Tremont is Tremont because of its residents, and the residents get stuff done through Block Clubs.

^I see your point about the suburban sh!t being built, but we must consider that Fairfax has more than just those homes.  The neighborhood's demographics would come into play regarding the businesses that set up shop there, which explains the Aldi's, McDonalds, Burger King, etc.  Pat Britt is the councilperson for Fairfax, and she has more than just the constituents which are housed in that suburban crap.  Avoiding politics (she has to appease to both lower and upper income residents), how do we plan for future businesses (which will more than likely cater to higher income residents) while appeasing to current residents who are not upper-income?  That's what's interesting about this situation.  We know that the neighborhood will inevitably change in the future, but how do give residents what they want in the present?

Some of the difference between Tremont and Midtown may involve how committed the residents are to their neighborhood.  This is often based on how voluntarily they're living where they live.  But every Cleveland neighborhood should benefit from high quality design and planning standards, not just the ones that have already gentrified.  My view is that the umph needs to come from city hall.  This is in no way a rejection of Block Clubs, which do great work.   

^I see your point about the suburban sh!t being built, but we must consider that Fairfax has more than just those homes.  The neighborhood's demographics would come into play regarding the businesses that set up shop there, which explains the Aldi's, McDonalds, Burger King, etc.  Pat Britt is the councilperson for Fairfax, and she has more than just the constituents which are housed in that suburban crap.  Avoiding politics (she has to appease to both lower and upper income residents), how do we plan for future businesses (which will more than likely cater to higher income residents) while appeasing to current residents who are not upper-income?  That's what's interesting about this situation.  We know that the neighborhood will inevitably change in the future, but how do give residents what they want in the present?

 

I still don't understand how the desires of current Fairfax residents would lead to poor urban design.  It's a separate issue from the mix of businesses in the area.  Aldis don't have to have no door on the street, and CVS's don't have to be built mid-parcel.  McDonalds has used many attractive and appropriate designs for its urban restaurants.  For some reason, this didn't happen for Midtown Cleveland.  Why? It would really surprise me to find out that Britt or her voters actively preferred this look for their McDonalds.

Some of the difference between Tremont and Midtown may involve how committed the residents are to their neighborhood. This is often based on how voluntarily they're living where they live. But every Cleveland neighborhood should benefit from high quality design and planning standards, not just the ones that have already gentrified. My view is that the umph needs to come from city hall. This is in no way a rejection of Block Clubs, which do great work.

 

One of the most committed Block Clubs I know of is in the decidedly non-gentrified part of Tremont.  They work like hell to keep their corner of the neighborhood safe and well-kempt, and their section is decidedly blue-collar in the best way that can be expressed, with folks who have lived there for generations (and who didn't "choose" to move there).  In Fairfax, the Block Club that covers E. 115th south of Woodland also is a model for what can take place by committed residents.

 

I don't know what you mean by "umph", but City Hall works with block clubs, not instead of.  City Hall can't be on the ground everywhere, so you need the clubs to provide the eyes on the street.  It's not enough to push this all off on the City.

Some of the difference between Tremont and Midtown may involve how committed the residents are to their neighborhood. This is often based on how voluntarily they're living where they live. But every Cleveland neighborhood should benefit from high quality design and planning standards, not just the ones that have already gentrified. My view is that the umph needs to come from city hall. This is in no way a rejection of Block Clubs, which do great work.

 

One of the most committed Block Clubs I know of is in the decidedly non-gentrified part of Tremont. They work like hell to keep their corner of the neighborhood safe and well-kempt, and their section is decidedly blue-collar in the best way that can be expressed, with folks who have lived there for generations (and who didn't "choose" to move there). In Fairfax, the Block Club that covers E. 115th south of Woodland also is a model for what can take place by committed residents.

 

I don't know what you mean by "umph", but City Hall works with block clubs, not instead of. City Hall can't be on the ground everywhere, so you need the clubs to provide the eyes on the street. It's not enough to push this all off on the City.

 

Building standards aren't the city's concern?  I don't understand that at all.  I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't understand.  Do Block Clubs get the opportunity to deny permits for inappropriate structures or demolitions?  If they do, that's awesome.  Is anyone at city hall being paid to handle this?  I know we have departments and boards of that nature.  Why are they being paid for this if the primary responsibility lies in private citizens who have other jobs?  How are Block Clubs able to affect areas of the city that are primarily commercial/institutional and have few residents?  What I'm getting at is I don't believe Block Clubs can be as effective for Midtown as they may be for Tremont or other mostly residential areas.  I also think this issue is squarely within any city hall's core of responsiblity.

^I see your point about the suburban sh!t being built, but we must consider that Fairfax has more than just those homes.  The neighborhood's demographics would come into play regarding the businesses that set up shop there, which explains the Aldi's, McDonalds, Burger King, etc.  Pat Britt is the councilperson for Fairfax, and she has more than just the constituents which are housed in that suburban crap.  Avoiding politics (she has to appease to both lower and upper income residents), how do we plan for future businesses (which will more than likely cater to higher income residents) while appeasing to current residents who are not upper-income?  That's what's interesting about this situation.  We know that the neighborhood will inevitably change in the future, but how do give residents what they want in the present?

 

I still don't understand how the desires of current Fairfax residents would lead to poor urban design.  It's a separate issue from the mix of businesses in the area.  Aldis don't have to have no door on the street, and CVS's don't have to be built mid-parcel.  McDonalds has used many attractive and appropriate designs for its urban restaurants.  For some reason, this didn't happen for Midtown Cleveland.  Why? It would really surprise me to find out that Britt or her voters actively preferred this look for their McDonalds.

 

You're preaching to the choir! :)  I feel the same way as you do about the poor design standards which have been allowed along this particular strip of Euclid.  Looking at the businesses mentioned, I don't think that building the Aldi's with an entrance facing the pedestrian right-of-way would have made much of a difference (it's still your typical Aldi's building design).  Though it would have been more pedestrian friendly... it's still an Aldi's.  Same thing for Burger King and McDonald's- those businesses could have been put elsewhere in the neighborhood, but were decided to be placed along one of the best urban corridors in the country.  The design points to Anywhere, USA when this is Cleveland.  Urban design standards in the city should be addressed, however it seems as though design comes second to getting "something" for constituents.       

You're right about the Aldi... the door location is but one of many problems.  I really have seen 100% urban McDonalds before, some free-standing and some not.  I've even seen more urban-friendly McDonalds in other parts of Cleveland.  My only complaint is about the building.  What you said about design coming second is, I believe, Cleveland's #1 problem.  Fix that and other things can begin to fall into place.  Until that is fixed, we will remain a substandard and illegitimate city in too many people's eyes.

^It seems as though the city is concentrating more on getting something, anything, to current city residents regardless of design.  I'm sure that the proposals for the businesses came before the CDC in the neighborhood, with no one objecting to the design of the buildings.  The residents left in Fairfax who might care about the design are few (I would assume), but could have demanded better design standards for the chains along Euclid.  If the constituents don't demand better, the political will just won't be there.  I would assume that these businesses had to come before city planning, and probably the board of zoning appeals.  These designs passed both.  I think it all comes down to politics, and anything being built in a Cleveland neighborhood outside of Downtown, Ohio City, or Tremont could be considered "progress" (to a politician).

Hasn't Midtown already taken steps in the right direction with the new zoning overlay for the district. I believe many of the structures/businesses being complained about were built/approved prior to this being put in place.

 

http://www.midtowncleveland.org/data/pdf/MTC%20master%20plan-zoning%20summaries.pdf

^It seems as though the city is concentrating more on getting something, anything, to current city residents regardless of design.  I'm sure that the proposals for the businesses came before the CDC in the neighborhood, with no one objecting to the design of the buildings.  The residents left in Fairfax who might care about the design are few (I would assume), but could have demanded better design standards for the chains along Euclid.  If the constituents don't demand better, the political will just won't be there.  I would assume that these businesses had to come before city planning, and probably the board of zoning appeals.  These designs passed both.  I think it all comes down to politics, and anything being built in a Cleveland neighborhood outside of Downtown, Ohio City, or Tremont could be considered "progress".

 

sorry oldmanladyluck, there are other stable areas in the city outside of OC, Tremont and Downtown.  (Why do people think those are the only places in the city where people want to live or that are perceived as popular and hip??)

 

People in Shaker Square, Edgewater wouldn't stand for it.

 

In regard to the chains, they have been there for as long as I remember.  Burgerking, KFC, & McDonald's have been there for at least 25/30 years.  I can remember when that McDonald's expanded.  My cousins (at various times) have worked at the Mickey D's, BK and KFC.  I can remember when Giant Eagle and Giant Tiger were still open. 

 

I suspect these business got a grandfathered clause, since they have been here.  Today, if they were being designed/built I would expect different building.

^Oh, I didn't know that ;)