A garden will be easier to develop in the future than a parking lot.

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.

 

I've always loved that house-- it's god a great neoclassical grandeur about it.  Bummer to hear it's in such rough shape.

 

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.

 

Yeah, this seemed pretty clear to me too. Given that Case seems to be banking these lots, I'm just relieved its not surface parking, so the community garden is just a bonus.

 

Even in the short term it would be awesome if Case/UCI enhanced the ped route from the new RTA station to Adelbert, but longer term this whole block and the surface lot to its north could make a great site for a large university-related or mixed use project. With that in mind, I'm happy to see Case slowly accumulating title.

Even in the short term it would be awesome if Case/UCI enhanced the ped route from the new RTA station to Adelbert, but longer term this whole block and the surface lot to its north could make a great site for a large university-related or mixed use project. With that in mind, I'm happy to see Case slowly accumulating title.

 

One can hope that this is what CWRU ultimately has in mind. Kind of ironic that they have medium-density campus housing from the 1950s on the hillside above the site -- farther from the CRWU campus than this large site bounded by the tracks, Cedar, Murray Hill and Adelbert.

Even in the short term it would be awesome if Case/UCI enhanced the ped route from the new RTA station to Adelbert, but longer term this whole block and the surface lot to its north could make a great site for a large university-related or mixed use project. With that in mind, I'm happy to see Case slowly accumulating title.

 

One can hope that this is what CWRU ultimately has in mind. Kind of ironic that they have medium-density campus housing from the 1950s on the hillside above the site -- farther from the CRWU campus than this large site bounded by the tracks, Cedar, Murray Hill and Adelbert.

 

Medium density?  In Manhattan terms maybe....

 

I used to live at the bottom of the hill, and the layout atop the elephant stairs is the same.

Medium density?  In Manhattan terms maybe....

 

 

In what-exists-on-the-south-side-of-cedar terms. There's no 60-story condo towers with grocery stores over there, are there? Then why the Manhattanist hyperbole?

Medium density?  In Manhattan terms maybe....

 

 

In what-exists-on-the-south-side-of-cedar terms. There's no 60-story condo towers with grocery stores over there, are there? Then why the Manhattanist hyperbole?

 

I'm pretty sure he's saying it would be considered high density here, especially when compared to what exists south of Cedar.

Medium density?  In Manhattan terms maybe....

 

 

In what-exists-on-the-south-side-of-cedar terms. There's no 60-story condo towers with grocery stores over there, are there? Then why the Manhattanist hyperbole?

 

I'm pretty sure he's saying it would be considered high density here, especially when compared to what exists south of Cedar.

 

Bingeaux.  And I did live there, for a year and a half.

Club Corbo/Golden Bowl is down.  The all-brick courtyard is lost forever.

 

Photo from a friend:

Sometimes I just don't know about this city.

^^Terrible.  How can you have a surface parking hole right in the middle of a high density district like this?  For all the positive that has happened in LI recently, this is one giant step backwards.  At least the investors have said the parking is an interim use.  We can only hope.

It's bad enough we have a scar like the Parking Lot On Public Square. Now a parking lot on Mayfield in Little Italy. A city with pride doesn't allow this to happen.

It's bad enough we have a scar like the Parking Lot On Public Square. Now a parking lot on Mayfield in Little Italy. A city with pride doesn't allow this to happen.

 

The only thing that will change this culture is getting more people to live in the city.  Right now there are plenty of Greater Clevelanders who love a night out in Little Italy, but they care more about convenient parking then density--because they live in Pepper Pike, Lyndhurst, etc....

Its a weak landmarks/planning commission, a weak city vision/leadership, and bad property owner problem.

 

I haven't had a chance to see it in person yet, but can imagine how awkward it looks and probably ruins the vibe/flow of the neighborhood.

^Agreed.

 

I'm really curious what the owner has in mind for that property. I know he (they?) said something about a "plaza," which makes no sense. When I have some time I'll try to figure out if surface parking is allowed under the current the zoning. That's the most obvious guess for the owner's intentions but who knows.  It's certainly awful. That gap in the retail strip is now about a third of the entire block. And I hate how the new plaza faces an existing gap across Mayfield.

^Agreed.

 

I'm really curious what the owner has in mind for that property. I know he (they?) said something about a "plaza," which makes no sense. When I have some time I'll try to figure out if surface parking is allowed under the current the zoning. That's the most obvious guess for the owner's intentions but who knows.  It's certainly awful. That gap in the retail strip is now about a third of the entire block. And I hate how the new plaza faces an existing gap across Mayfield.

 

I am increasingly sick to my stomach the more I think about this demolition for the integrity and urban fabric of the neighborhood.

 

I believe the "plaza" talk was about letting 100 year old, all-brick courtyard survive. 

^Agreed.

 

I'm really curious what the owner has in mind for that property. I know he (they?) said something about a "plaza," which makes no sense. When I have some time I'll try to figure out if surface parking is allowed under the current the zoning. That's the most obvious guess for the owner's intentions but who knows.  It's certainly awful. That gap in the retail strip is now about a third of the entire block. And I hate how the new plaza faces an existing gap across Mayfield.

 

Gee, how about an Olive Garden or Carrabba's! <<ready for the incoming!>>

Its a weak landmarks/planning commission, a weak city vision/leadership, and bad property owner problem.

 

I totally agree with you ClevelandOhio, and unfortunately this wretched theme plays out again and again in the City: How Dan Gilbert runs roughshod on our historic preservation sensibilities, but city officials bury their heads because his casino brings in tax dollars and, as KJP noted, the wimpishness to allow property owners to maintain a hole on Public Square, the “living room” of the city.  Of course, next door, the Warehouse District is similarly scarred…. Once again, where is the proper use of eminent domain when you need it a Club Corbo is demolished and a business district is severely damaged?  Just because Frank Jackson has helped usher in a burst of significant development downtown and in certain trendy neighborhoods, should he get a “bye” for stuff like this?  Is LI pressuring its councilman about this?

 

^ I think the development would have happened in Downtown and the trendier neighborhoods anyway so I wouldn't give Frank Jackson too much credit(although he didn't hurt development which is a plus). He fails at being a leader IMO especially in situations dealing with demolitions. We like to say the 1960s are over, but I feel like the past couple years demolition of historic structures is just as prevalent.

 

Without going too far off topic, does anyone have pictures of the two buildings demolished on Euclid Avenue by East 55th a few years ago? I think for the Healthline.

 

Edit: Nevermind I found them. What a loss.

It's bad enough we have a scar like the Parking Lot On Public Square. Now a parking lot on Mayfield in Little Italy. A city with pride doesn't allow this to happen.

 

The only thing that will change this culture is getting more people to live in the city.  Right now there are plenty of Greater Clevelanders who love a night out in Little Italy, but they care more about convenient parking then density--because they live in Pepper Pike, Lyndhurst, etc....

 

Well, yeah. 

 

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

Serious question:  Is there opposition to the lot in the neighborhood?

 

Does little italy need help? Everytime I'm there the place is packed. People like to go for the atmosphere as well as the food. This demolition just hurt the atmosphere a bit. My guess is that the Mayfield Theater will be next to go.

It's bad enough we have a scar like the Parking Lot On Public Square. Now a parking lot on Mayfield in Little Italy. A city with pride doesn't allow this to happen.

 

The only thing that will change this culture is getting more people to live in the city.  Right now there are plenty of Greater Clevelanders who love a night out in Little Italy, but they care more about convenient parking then density--because they live in Pepper Pike, Lyndhurst, etc....

 

Well, yeah. 

 

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

Serious question:  Is there opposition to the lot in the neighborhood?

 

Why do you think people from the suburbs go to Little Italy instead of Olive Garden?  It's not for the available parking.

 

Sure, having parking will make those people happier.  But if it's at the expense of the atmosphere (which includes density, even to those people), then it will hurt Little Italy much more than it will help it.

 

I know you think we're the ones always trying to exert our will of density on others, but I don't see city-folk trying to build dense neighborhoods in Chesterland.  Rather, it's people from the exurbs demanding more parking and (in this case) tearing down buildings on property they own to suburbanize the city.  They can build the style of neighborhood they want out in BFE, but zoning should stop them from doing so in the middle of the city.

^Exactly. The lot won't help much because, it hurts the atmosphere,  they might charge for parking, and if parking is the real goal, each restaurant there would need a parking lot that size.  So in the big picture this lot won't improve anything.

 

The neighborhood was thriving without it and has been fine without loads of parking forever. I don't think anything has changed.

The neighborhood was thriving without it and has been fine without loads of parking forever. I don't think anything has changed.

 

Whenever my wife's grandma visits us (from the way way out suburbs), she loves for us to take her down to Little Italy and sit out on the patio at Presti's and people watch.  She can do it for hours, and even will say things like "I wish I lived in one of those buildings" (apartments above stores).  As soon as she leaves and goes back to the exurbs, she loses that will, but for the short time she's visiting Little Italy, she's reveling in the glory of the density and activity.  She comes there to enjoy the density even though she doesn't live that lifestyle.  She doesn't bring her exurban sensibilities with her.  I would bet that's the case for most people visiting Little Italy from the suburbs.  If they wanted it to be just like a suburb, they would have just gone to the local Italian restaurant in the strip plaza by their house.

 

The neighborhood was thriving without it and has been fine without loads of parking forever. I don't think anything has changed.

 

Whenever my wife's grandma visits us (from the way way out suburbs), she loves for us to take her down to Little Italy and sit out on the patio at Presti's and people watch.  She can do it for hours, and even will say things like "I wish I lived in one of those buildings" (apartments above stores).  As soon as she leaves and goes back to the exurbs, she loses that will, but for the short time she's visiting Little Italy, she's reveling in the glory of the density and activity.  She comes there to enjoy the density even though she doesn't live that lifestyle.  She doesn't bring her exurban sensibilities with her.  I would bet that's the case for most people visiting Little Italy from the suburbs.  If they wanted it to be just like a suburb, they would have just gone to the local Italian restaurant in the strip plaza by their house.

 

 

It's on her own terms, though.  It's just like interaction in general, the increasing tendency in our society is to pick and choose....and opt away from it when one sees fit.

 

The phrase "nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there" comes to mind. 

 

As I said, Corbo's not a great spot for a parking lot and I don't expect to see it stay one long.  But if the neighborhood itself isn't having an issue with it...

Good spot for a mid-rise apartment building with ground floor retail.

^or two mid-rise bldgs side by side that do not look identical, with ground floor retail. one building a condo and one a rental place. (with one big parking garage wholly underground for both.)

As I said, Corbo's not a great spot for a parking lot and I don't expect to see it stay one long.  But if the neighborhood itself isn't having an issue with it...[/color]

 

Excuse me, but when did the neighborhood declare itself as not having an issue with this instant surface parking?  It’s only been one week since an outside speculator/private developer bulldozed the Corbo’s edifice leaving it as surface parking despite the developer “hoping” it won’t last as such long.  I’d hardly say this sudden and sad turn of events by one dollar-driven private entity foisting itself on LI’s thriving entertainment district represents some kind of surface parking plebiscite by LI's residents. 

 

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

I wish you, or some other conservative, would point to any appealing urban residential/entertainment neighborhood anywhere that uses the availability of parking as its (or even a) major selling point.

 

The neighborhood was thriving without it and has been fine without loads of parking forever. I don't think anything has changed.

 

Whenever my wife's grandma visits us (from the way way out suburbs), she loves for us to take her down to Little Italy and sit out on the patio at Presti's and people watch.  She can do it for hours, and even will say things like "I wish I lived in one of those buildings" (apartments above stores).  As soon as she leaves and goes back to the exurbs, she loses that will, but for the short time she's visiting Little Italy, she's reveling in the glory of the density and activity.  She comes there to enjoy the density even though she doesn't live that lifestyle.  She doesn't bring her exurban sensibilities with her.  I would bet that's the case for most people visiting Little Italy from the suburbs.  If they wanted it to be just like a suburb, they would have just gone to the local Italian restaurant in the strip plaza by their house.

 

 

It's on her own terms, though.  It's just like interaction in general, the increasing tendency in our society is to pick and choose....and opt away from it when one sees fit.

 

The phrase "nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there" comes to mind. 

 

As I said, Corbo's not a great spot for a parking lot and I don't expect to see it stay one long.  But if the neighborhood itself isn't having an issue with it...

 

You missed my point.  I used her as an example because she absolutely is one of those people.  You don't have to tell me that.  The point was that even people like that enjoy Little Italy because of the dense neighborhood it is, even if it's only to visit and return to their sprawl.

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

I wish you, or some other conservative, would point to any appealing urban residential/entertainment neighborhood anywhere that uses the availability of parking as its (or even a) major selling point.

 

I'm a conservative, but I think E Rocc is (usually) way off. I would argue, as others have, that it's fundamentally unconservative to support virtually unlimited sprawl as he does. Sprawl is a drain on resources and is an unnecessary waste of tax dollars in the myriad of duplicative services and unnecessary government bodies. So, I don't think you were doing this but PLEASE don't group all of us together.

 

Back on topic, parking IS important. I think its foolish to act like it isn't. But I don't think the parking issue either stops or encourages people to come to LI. The people who allow parking to stop them from coming to LI probably wouldn't be going there anyway. And on the flip side, most people don't go to LI because of the density. They go because of what's in the neighborhood. THAT more than anything is what matters. The average person doesn't give a damn about the things we care about. It's all about the experience. That's what matters to the average person, not parking vs. no parking

^^^Liberals hate cities too, were/are racist, abandoned the city, love free parking, big cars, and suburbs too. It's not unique to conservatives.

....and that's enough of the liberal/conservative/general sprawl discussion.  Let's keep this to Projects and Construction in Little Italy.

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

I wish you, or some other conservative, would point to any appealing urban residential/entertainment neighborhood anywhere that uses the availability of parking as its (or even a) major selling point.

 

 

Coventry built that big garage where Coventry Beverage used to be....

I'm not sure some here realize that a significant plurality, perhaps a majority, in this region looks at "density" the way the consensus here looks at "sprawl". 

I'm not a big fan of putting a lot at Corbo.  But a secure lot somewhere (off street preferably) will help LI.  Parallel parking is a lost art and a lot of people simply don't like trusting valets.

 

I wish you, or some other conservative, would point to any appealing urban residential/entertainment neighborhood anywhere that uses the availability of parking as its (or even a) major selling point.

 

I'm a conservative, but I think E Rocc is (usually) way off. I would argue, as others have, that it's fundamentally unconservative to support virtually unlimited sprawl as he does. Sprawl is a drain on resources and is an unnecessary waste of tax dollars in the myriad of duplicative services and unnecessary government bodies. So, I don't think you were doing this but PLEASE don't group all of us together.

 

Back on topic, parking IS important. I think its foolish to act like it isn't. But I don't think the parking issue either stops or encourages people to come to LI. The people who allow parking to stop them from coming to LI probably wouldn't be going there anyway. And on the flip side, most people don't go to LI because of the density. They go because of what's in the neighborhood. THAT more than anything is what matters. The average person doesn't give a damn about the things we care about. It's all about the experience. That's what matters to the average person, not parking vs. no parking

 

Agreed on the second part, it has a lot more to do with what's there than anything else.  That borderline person waffling about the trip that day may consider parking a factor, and it certainly helps with the in-and-out shopper crowd.  But LI is LI because of what's there.

 

As an aside, I definitely believe in limits to sprawl, but not artificially imposed limits.  If I have less of a problem with tax money being spent to facilitate it, it's because I consider where that money came from.  Thought I had said that on the sprawl thread....

I'm guessing if you polled all the business (mostly restaurant) owners in LI, the number one complaint they probably hear from their customers and would-be customers is the lack of parking.  If they had a parking ramp there that they could send their valets scurrying back and forth from, I'm sure none of them would complain.

 

(Please don't take this as an endorsement of such a plan--I don't intend it to be so.  Purely speculating).

I'm guessing if you polled all the business (mostly restaurant) owners in LI, the number one complaint they probably hear from their customers and would-be customers is the lack of parking.  If they had a parking ramp there that they could send their valets scurrying back and forth from, I'm sure none of them would complain.

 

(Please don't take this as an endorsement of such a plan--I don't intend it to be so.  Purely speculating).

 

Residents also.....if I recall correctly a lot of houses don't have driveways and people park in the street. 

 

My instinct, at least in a thriving neighborhood, is to go with what the residents and business prefer. 

My instinct, at least in a thriving neighborhood, is to go with what the residents and business prefer.

Yeah, let's move into a thriving neighborhood. Then encourage wrecking it to make me happy. Even if that means destroying what made it thriving in the first place. Lol

Funny how we humans end up loving things to death sometimes. We don't always act like cancerous parasites though. I wonder what ability we possess that can and often does keep us from acting like that? Hmmmm...

 

 

Some infill......

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2014/02132014/index.php

 

Cleveland Landmarks Commission

AGENDA - February 13, 2014

 

Little Italy Historic District

1918 East 120th Street

New construction of 2 houses

 

 

 

 

 

 

That infill looks great!

Love it. For sale units seem to do very well in Little Italy. New apartments would probably do great too since even the extremely outdated units go fast.

^^ That is pretty cool. The lot was available for a couple months as a single new construction home. The listing was updated and split into two units:

 

Unit A

3 beds, 1800 sqft

$340,000

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1918-E-120th-St-UNIT-A-Cleveland-OH-44106/2108826755_zpid/

 

Unit B

3 beds, 2000 sqft

$360,000

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1918-E-120th-St-UNIT-B-Cleveland-OH-44106/2108826756_zpid/

So NOW when is the REAL construction of the rapid station by Mayfield Road to begin??

So NOW when is the REAL construction of the rapid station by Mayfield Road to begin??

 

Follow and discuss station construction progress here:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,6956.msg704176.html#msg704176

Apartments could rise on former Woodhill Supply site in Little Italy, under plans floated by Visconsi

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Apartments might rise on a blighted industrial site in Cleveland's Little Italy, a tightly packed neighborhood that offers few opportunities for large projects.

 

Visconsi Companies Ltd., a family owned developer best known for retail investments, is studying a residential revamp of the former Woodhill Supply property on East 123rd Street. People familiar with the project say that Visconsi could build roughly 150 apartments - give or take a few dozen - on the land, at the northern edge of Little Italy near the eastern rim of University Circle.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/05/apartments_could_rise_on_forme.html#incart_river_default

^Interesting!  And at the end of that article was info about a separate possible project on the site of the Primo Vino restaurant building on Mayfield.

There is such a pent up demand for housing in Little Italy.  Check out what real estate is going for there http://www.zillow.com/little-italy-cleveland-oh/

 

These apartment will be preleased and snatched up before it can even open. 

There is such a pent up demand for housing in Little Italy.  Check out what real estate is going for there http://www.zillow.com/little-italy-cleveland-oh/

 

These apartment will be preleased and snatched up before it can even open. 

 

How is that house listing for four times its estimated value?  Someone simply "selling" it without being serious?

But who determines these "estimated values?"  I guess that's my point -- supply and demand.  Location, Location, Location.  Property values and rents in the area continue to spike.

 

 

The "Zestimates" come from Zillow's proprietary algorithms and rely only on a few data points, like lot size, house size, house age, and rough location.  The estimate doesn't account for the condition of the house (so no points for a new kitchen) and I suspect their location data isn't fine-grained enough to differentiate between Little Italy and other nearby city neighborhoods, which we know are like night and day in terms of value.