This house is at the corner of Murray Hill Road and Glenwood Avenue -- across the street from UC-Cedar Rapid station that is undergoing major renovation (ie: replacement). I am wondering if that station project is causing this demo, which is on a commercially-zoned property and next to another.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2013/01242013/index.php

 

Little Italy Historic District

11429 Glenwood Avenue

Demolition

 

It's sale listing.....

http://realtycleveland.com/11429_Glenwood/Glenwood.html

 

 

Turns out CWRU bought this property and one behind it (11430 Fairchild Ave, which has a house on it too) in October 2011 combined for just $48,000 (the prior owner wanted $265,000). Apparently it was a foreclosure because both properties were bought via a sheriff's deed.

 

I'm curious if other houses in the area  (at 11430 Fairchild) is due to be demolished too? Turns out CWRU also owns the houses at 11414, 11422, 11426 and 11430 Fairchild plus two non-addressed properties on Fairchild as well as two other properties on Glenwood (11407 and 11409) which it bought since the 1990s. There are only four parcels in this small block of houses that CWRU does not own including three on Glenwood (11415-11423) and just one one on Fairchild (11420).

 

I see the house to be demolished is in poor shape but not so terrible that it cannot be saved, especially for the price at which it was purchased.

 

Anyone know what, if anything, is going on here?

On the landmarks commission

 

Little Italy Historic District

1991 East 126th Street

New house construction

Sorry I couldn't finish my thought above -- work intrudes on UO sometimes....  UC-oriented development (notably new construction) is moving in every direction from UC except due east. The reasons are the tracks, the "sacred-ness" historic district of Little Italy and the hill going up to the Heights. But development is moving to the northeast along Euclid into East Cleveland, but even that is constrained by the presence of Lakeview Cemetery. There's plenty of room for development to spread. But that doesn't mean that UC-oriented investment is avoiding Little Italy. Quite the contrary. As Strap noted above, Little Italy has become dominated by UC population. The reason is because of what Little Italy already offers -- a wonderfully compact, historic district with a rich history. To destroy that would be to destroy what makes Little Italy so attractive. If anything, the spillover effect of UC would be to renovate and/or reuse existing buildings like the Smith Building, whose photographs appear in this thread.

 

Little Italy is the last Cleveland neighborhood to retain its ethnic character in any significant way.  Even if one discounts the impact of the landmarks and various historical commissions, it's likely to stay that way.  While the original reasons why might not bear close examination by the politically oversensitive, the arts community as well as the UC community have an interest in keeping it like it is.

A new wine bar opened in Little Italy earlier this month I believe, or maybe end of june. Ive noticed work going on inside for awhile now but no mention of it on here or in the news. It has been a relatively quite open.

 

I went there a few weeks ago and really liked it. I think it is a great addition to the neighborhood. Great atmosphere. The inside is great and the night we went they had a live music. In the bar they have a grand piano and an older white man was playing/singing while his partner, an older black man(the hostility of the past really is gone) was playing some sort of horn instrument I believe.

 

I really hope this place does well, and gets some press!

 

http://www.vinoveritaslittleitaly.com/

 

From their website

 

Thanks, ClevelandOhio, that's a great looking wine bar.

 

This thread is for development news, not for stoking old racial faultlines.

Club Corbo demolition proposed......

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7006.msg667819.html#msg667819

At least save the best courtyard in Little Italy!!

At least save the best courtyard in Little Italy!!

 

Best in the city! This really aggravates me. One of the best things about Little Italy is how it mayfield road has mostly stayed intact. I'm sick of shitty landlords letting buildings go to waste to the point where demolition turns it into to a parking lot. We need to start increasing fines for code violations.

At least save the best courtyard in Little Italy!!

 

Best in the city! This really aggravates me. One of the best things about Little Italy is how it mayfield road has mostly stayed intact. I'm sick of shitty landlords letting buildings go to waste to the point where demolition turns it into to a parking lot. We need to start increasing fines for code violations.

 

And even seize and re-sell buildings if owners refuse to address their properties after repeated warnings.

^There may be legal precedent for this; a kind of reverse eminent domain to seize property to save it rather than demolish it.  Using it for Corbo's in this excellent, intact strip of mainly old buildings would be a good test case.

^That would still just be eminent domain...and not clear it would be legal under the Ohio Constitution.

 

This is really horrible. It's my favorite courtyard too.  This is a great example where the city needs to hold firm with zoning rules that prohibit surface parking so building owners aren't even tempted to think about it.

^That would still just be eminent domain...and not clear it would be legal under the Ohio Constitution.

 

True, but the point being that it is counterintuitive to use ED to save property rather than demolish it for "the public good" which is the way ED is usually used.  I’ve never seen it used in the manner I suggest.  This is usually done with a Historic Preservation designation which I doubt Corbo’s has.

Club Corbo demolition proposed......

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7006.msg667819.html#msg667819

 

"@mjarboe: Retail group seeks OK to raze Club Corbo bldg in #CLE's Little Italy: http://t.co/yoNdmnkrMC Parking for now. Long-term development play."

^Who are they kidding...given the parking situation in Little Italy this will become a parking lot FOREVER.  Nothing the owners are spouting about future development leads me to think other wise. 

Next up will be the mayfield theater which will leave them with one giant lot, destroying one of the things that makes Little Italy great, it's lack of ugly parking lots disconnecting the neighborhood.

wow.... very sad to see one of the coolest courtyards in Cleveland being destroyed. 

 

Since it only takes up the NE Corner...is possible to demo the rest of the structure and wrap around the parking?  This really would create a place holder for future development.

Next up will be the mayfield theater which will leave them with one giant lot, destroying one of the things that makes Little Italy great, it's lack of ugly parking lots disconnecting the neighborhood.

 

The usual trick is an "accidental fire" caused by a welder's torch or some other difficult to prove arson.

Yeah I think the Corbo's already received their insurance pay out a few years back from the Club Corbo fire damage...

Yeah I think the Corbo's already received their insurance pay out a few years back from the Club Corbo fire damage...

 

Actually, I was anticipating future events at the Mayfield Theater. :-o

wow.... very sad to see one of the coolest courtyards in Cleveland being destroyed. 

 

Since it only takes up the NE Corner...is possible to demo the rest of the structure and wrap around the parking?  This really would create a place holder for future development.

 

This will certainly be a big loss to the urban fabric that makes LI such a great, intimate walkable neighborhood... Planners, at least, must insist that parking be in the form of deck parking over ground floor retail with side or rear access to the parking ramp, in order to maintain sidewalk presence of the neighborhood.

 

 

It's going to be a surface parking lot.

It's going to be a surface parking lot.

 

Which I THINK would be a sign that it really is just temporary...I could tolerate a temporary lot, I would be depressed with a permanent garage.

^Read the PD article...there is nothing in it that suggests to me this is going to be a temporary lot (especially given the lack of parking in LI) despite the spouting of the owners.  They even admit they have no plans for development now.

I'm with Htsguy. These guys are going to make a ton of money off that parking lot. Maybe more than they can earn by any other use.

Speaking as an out of towner who drove around looking for a place to park, I still think it's a crying shame to put a surface lot there.

I think the "parking shortage" concern is a bit overblown for LI.  We don't have a parking shortage in LI.  We have a "free parking" shortage in LI.  The lot I pay to park in down by the RR tracks is never even remotely close to full, even on the weekends.  I assume this will be a pay-to-park lot.

 

I think this fear is partly a result of a defeatist attitude.  Vibrant cities/nabes don't worry about this because the potential profit from an actual development outweighs the profit for parking...... unless we are talking about the Sunset Strip in LA.  I would hope that LI has enough going for it that it wouldn't make sense to just sit back and collect parking fees on such a prime parcel, notwithstanding low maintenance costs.

I can find free street parking right by mayfield any day at anytime. It's not that hard if you know where to look. People are just want a large visable free lot. Also I keep hearing about a parking problem, but that doesn't seem to affect the business of the restaurants that always seem to be busy. Way overblown. 

 

Maybe since they say the building is a hazard, we can demolish it and save the courtyard as a compromise?

Has anyone written to the landmarks commission? I have been meaning to but haven't had the time the past couple of days. I know the landmarks commission has made a few controversial decisions, but I can't believe they would allow this in perhaps THE best urban nabe in cleveland. It would be a travesty. If they want to demolish it, then fine, but they should not even be allowed to touch that building until they are working with a selected developer. I thought in order to demolish a historic structure, you had to have a redevelopment plan to present. A F$@&ing parking lot isn't a redevelopment plan!!!!

If the city doesn't want new surface lots on Mayfield (I sure don't), it should just zone them out.  I'm sure property owners would freak, but tough.

 

How much does the pay lot by the rapid tracks charge?

I can find free street parking right by mayfield any day at anytime. It's not that hard if you know where to look. People are just want a large visable free lot. Also I keep hearing about a parking problem, but that doesn't seem to affect the business of the restaurants that always seem to be busy. Way overblown. 

 

Maybe since they say the building is a hazard, we can demolish it and save the courtyard as a compromise?

 

Isn't there already a large visible lot right before the bridge on the right if you're heading towards euclid? I know I've parked in there before.

If the city doesn't want new surface lots on Mayfield (I sure don't), it should just zone them out.  I'm sure property owners would freak, but tough.

 

How much does the pay lot by the rapid tracks charge?

 

I believe it was only a few dollars when they had a guy out there collecting and something in that same ballpark with the automatic pay station.

 

Re the zoning change, I would welcome it..... but I'm not so sure whether it could be applied retroactively to people who bought properties on Mayfield prior to the change.

^A zoning change would apply without regard to when people bought properties, but if a property owner has already gotten his or her permits for a lot project, their right to develop it will have already vested, so wouldn't be affected (I think that is what you're getting at).  (And of course, existing lots would be grandfathered in.)  So yeah, probably too late to block this proposal. This is something the city should have thought about years ago, and would still be good change in case other owners want to follow suit.

Isn't there some sort of city ordinance (at least for downtown) that prevents a surface lot being developed after the demo of a building.  I beleive that is why the lot on 14th and Prospect where that old Firestone Building was did not become a parking lot when it was demoed (but eventually was allowed for some reason with the development of the Hanna across the street into apartments).

I find it hard to believe that surface parking would be a more profitable use than a handful of $400k new construction townhouses similar to the ones up Mayfield and Edgehill.

Maybe since they say the building is a hazard, we can demolish it and save the courtyard as a compromise?

 

My exact thoughts -- seems like an easy compromise if the parking lot is inevitable in the short term.

On Tuesday, the RTA Board awarded a construction contract for the new Little Italy-University Circle Rapid Station, to be built at Mayfield Road and East 119th Street. Look for an Oct. 22 ground-breaking.

On Tuesday, the RTA Board awarded a construction contract for the new Little Italy-University Circle Rapid Station, to be built at Mayfield Road and East 119th Street. Look for an Oct. 22 ground-breaking.

 

Great news! And for further discussion, see:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,6956.0.html

^^ So LI's getting a new Red Line station while planning to demolish a key structure on its core Main Street strip in favor of surface parking... 1 step forward, 2 steps back...

Why is a garden being proposed in the walkable range of a rail station that is seeing significant reconstruction? I realize the garden isn't the formal plan, and that a land use plan of some kind must be submitted to the Landmarks Commission to get a structural demolition approved. But a garden?? How does a garden result in increased use of a high-capacity transit facility? You put your gardens beyond the walkable service area (2,500+ feet) from the station and you put progressively larger, more mixed-use structure closer to a station.

 

Only In Cleveland do we put used car lots, self-serve storage facilities and gardens within 2,500 feet of rail stations. I think some of these folks need to go back to urban planning school and if they never did attend any planning courses, then how in the world did they gain their positions? Rant off...

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2013/10102013/index.php

 

CLEVELAND LANDMARK COMMISSION

CITY HALL - ROOM 514 - 9:00 AM

AGENDA - October 10, 2013

 

Little Italy Historic District: Case 13-003

11429 Glenwood Avenue

Demolition

 

 

 

 

I think some of these folks need to go back to urban planning school and if they never did attend any planning courses, then how in the world did they gain their positions?

 

In Cuyahoga County, you ask that?  :o

^ I remember walking by that house two months ago and thought that it looked really bad. It might have had a condemned sign on it. By taking a look at the site plan, I would venture the following guess:

 

They are pointing out that there are 3 parcels (2 owners) left outside of CWRU control. Once they get control of the block, then they'll demo the block once they have a "higher and better use" planned" for the block. Until then, they'll make that corner lot look nice by planting some nice fruit trees, etc.

^ I remember walking by that house two months ago and thought that it looked really bad. It might have had a condemned sign on it. By taking a look at the site plan, I would venture the following guess:

 

They are pointing out that there are 3 parcels (2 owners) left outside of CWRU control. Once they get control of the block, then they'll demo the block once they have a "higher and better use" planned" for the block. Until then, they'll make that corner lot look nice by planting some nice fruit trees, etc.

 

A long long time ago in a galaxy not so far away, that block was outside my window for a semester.  It was nothing special then.

 

This isn't a garden, per se.  More of an urban farm.  Considering the proximity of Little Italy, it's not a bad idea, actually.

This isn't a garden, per se.  More of an urban farm.  Considering the proximity of Little Italy, it's not a bad idea, actually.

 

It's a wonderful idea. It's an awful location.

Because planners care/know more about urban farming than urban design.

This isn't a garden, per se.  More of an urban farm.  Considering the proximity of Little Italy, it's not a bad idea, actually.

 

It's a wonderful idea. It's an awful location.

 

If I am interpreting KJP's comments correctly, the point is that high density housing and entertainment development should be placed closer to mass transportation in Cleveland. Not parking lots, urban farms and storage facilities... You want to develop around the transit hubs so that hundreds (if not thousands) of people have no more than a 5-10 minute walk from their living/dining/etc. to the transit system.

While this use and location clearly doesn't make, at least it's something that's easily removed if a new plan comes into being.  Thankfully it's not in the hands of a gas station or bank.

The house next to it was for sale for a long time.  I actually looked at it a couple years ago.  Although architecturally a very interesting place, it was in horrible disrepair and needed a ton of work to get it even livable (like burst pipes leaking had put holes in the ceiling, plaster peeled off the walls everywhere, stucco falling off the outside, etc.).  I noticed that someone finally bought it a few months ago, so I wonder if they're planning on restoring it.  The house next to it (on the other side) looked to be lived in by a family and I believe it still is.  The blue house on the corner which is being demoed must have been in foreclosure at the time I looked at the one next to it because I remember seeing people in it but not knowing what was going on (it seemed to me that they might have been fixing it up).  Soon after, CWRU bought it in a Sheriff's Sale apparently.

I read this as being simply a green area.  Very easily developed over IF someone steps up with the desire, incentive, and most importantly, the $$$$$$$$$$$$.  If they whole block was acquired it would be a good location for a high-rise, perhaps.  I would prefer that slow approach to simply turning over one lot at a time.

 

Btw, there already is an urban farm in LI, and it is right up against the tracks.

While this use and location clearly doesn't make, at least it's something that's easily removed if a new plan comes into being.  Thankfully it's not in the hands of a gas station or bank.

If it ends of being a vegetable garden, depending on what is planted, it could become a type of "gas station".