Away with the Fairies – Living in Lorain

November 13, 2013 at 4:48 pm 20 comments

UPDATE: For Paula and Tammy re the plans and studies REMEMBER THIS ONE??????
Lakefront urban development

‘COME FLY AWAY WITH ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Away with the Fairies

Come and lay down in the meadow
Rest your head amongst the flowers

It is probably time for me to just walk away FROM ADVOCACY- wrap myself in my ivy covered walls and let Lorain go- she is no longer good for my blood pressure. Perhaps, due to age and time, I just can’t go on looking at things with rose-coloured glasses as I posted on face book last night – maybe I am done with “data dancing” and studies. and the way “government works ( or doesn’t )….I no longer have the time left to wait for the results of government- not this Loraine or that Lorain.

the law

I have just returned home from the Buildings and Lands committee meeting at city hall… I am bemused, disgusted, and totally fed up with the way this city and government postulates and procrastinate and uses studies as tools and YET for all their talk my icon house which was featured in the study was used as an example of the problem – trouble is this vacant house has been a problem and complaint driven to these same Lorain city government agencies for 40 YEARS!!!!! Lorain has no teeth in her building codes or enforcement but they talk a good game – give me strength it is like living with the fairies in this community!

Should you care to see the lack of teeth in our building codes and enforcement in Lorain here they are . I wrote series about our “enforcement” or lack thereof !

So what got me in a tizz- wozz last night? You would think the report from Thriving Communities Institute of the Western Reserve Land Conservancy- Sarah Ryzner, the institute’s director of projects, and Paul Boehnlein, GIS and conservation planning specialist as summarized by Rick Payerchin of the Morning Journal would have been something to smile about. You would be wrong !

We sat in the audience listening to the self- congratulatory twaddle that always comes with these “study projects”. We sat for 40 minutes whilst we learned about how the process went ,pregnancy and yellow T-shirts included, although quite frankly it should have taken no more than 10 minutes- but that too is par for the course.

study  heads

And then the numbers!
Oh we aren’t so bad off at all with our housing stock as we were treated to examples of home gradings of A through F.

As I looked at the photos of what this group considered a “B” home I choked- the C caused me even more discomfort but the F example was my “icon home

Yes! the one that I have complained about on three different blogs for many years and to whom I have spent 30 of the 40 years it has now been standing EMPTY and open to the elements complaining ( and this IS a complaint driven process here in Lorain) through the BUILDING DEPT. Nothing happened with in 30 years of complaints but of course if you read the links of what the Building Dept. can and can’t do and taking into account the loop holes found by our illustrious slum lords ( oops can’t call them that now after this report, you see those homes are apparently B and C) well don’t hold you breath.

Complaints made to administrations that come and go , through Community Development, through representatives on city council , anyone who was PAID to listen and deal with these problems . Still the house on the corner of 4th and Hamilton stands as derelict and disgraceful as she has been for decades.

2th and Hamiton
Yes! here was that house – bold as brass up on the screen- part of YET ANOTHER study . A study and report that I find decidedly lacking .

I would like to know the experience and knowledge as to the people conducting the study as to their expertise in Lorain’s building code violations, their architectural background as they stood on the sidewalk determining their A, B, C’s . The bar they set was so LOW as to what was an A, B, of C home was to me just another “Data Dancing” report to get the money to pay the piper.

data dancingcol
So what ? These studies/reports are just another tool governments use is done all the time, nobody reads these things anyway – it is just used to show the whomever is doling out the dollars they have documentation. Oh look! we have included data in our quest for tax payer dollars.
Everyone on the administrative staff and council knew the “protocol” as did we.

That is fine only please don’t insult the intelligence of those of us who live here, who deal with those B and C homes with such a report.


WE have to identify the problems to fix them . BUT!!!! I can only stomach so much clap trap and I am full to overflowing.

I said my piece at the microphone, which included my differing opinion with the way the homes in this community are graded by this particular “study” and data, because quite frankly I have dealt with the “vermin” in some of those very homes B and C. I wonder the grading curve , was Lorain’s housing stock compared to Youngstown, East Cleveland certainly not Lakewood as their D even F houses would fit in the A category for Lorain according to the photos presented.

So what good my rant? It amounts to nothing, it won’t change a thing in the way government works, dollars are dished out , data is danced and Lorain continues, just as ranting about a house on the corner of 4th and Hamilton has done NOTHING we continue…….. . Oh the house will come down one way or another , either by its own volition or the system will “FINALLY” work but even as we speak this B and C homes so “nicely” portrayed are deteriorating with each rain drop , each broken window, each missing downspout, each building permit NOT USED or code enforced, each STUDY!!! My data doesn’t dance it screams …….

The only positive thing I took away from the meeting at least the City of Lorain didn’t pay for the study that was Nordson………….

Away  With  the Fairies by  Richard Adams

Away With the Fairies by Richard Adams

Entry filed under: a Cow -elle opinion, Charleston Village, city of lorain, commentary, Lorain Multi Property Owners, notorious opponents of exactitude. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

NOV.11th- Flanders Fields -Remembering War Welcome to Fairyland – aka In the Pink Lorain, Ohio

20 Comments Add your own

  • 1. aka/mozart  |  November 13, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    well you have said it all…while not pregnant or wearing a uellow…it was very frustrating.;.as we know that we are not tipping but flatly on our backs…( which wouldn’t be so bad if at least we got some enjoyment out of it) 🙂 ..not to mention MR. CLOWN HEAD RICHARDSON..AND HIS CHARACTER ASSASSINATION OF DENNIS FLORES ON THE FLOOR… gee i wonder if he has passed that bar exam yet….errrrr and ugh!!!

  • 2. momisbroke  |  November 13, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    Oh my, the frustration! My mother grew up on Hamilton Ave. I get a heavy heart hearing her warm reminiscence of younger days when Lorain, OH was a gem, a shining star. There were lilac bushes blooming on every corner, bakery scents wafting through the air, ladies bustling down Broadway with their wares. Woe to Lorain, OH for it is only a microcosm of our land, our country…….

  • 3. Mark Teleha  |  November 13, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    This city is so head-up-their asses inept, it makes me sick. I can’t say for sure that any of them has a clue as to what they’re doing, or what direction they need to be going in. Do they have a purpose? Goal? Target? I think they come to council, nod their heads, make comments about what their constituents have complained to them about, and then adjourn the meeting.

  • 4. thatwoman  |  November 13, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    I agree Denise Mr. Richardson comments were inflammatory at best. he unless he was with Councilman Flores when he took the hundreds of photos he has no idea or evidence of illegality as to the circumstances under which Flores took the photos- so say he didn’t want people to think council ( paraphrasing) went in for “illegal activities” was political posturing in its highest form and he should apologize for such remarks on council floor…….

  • 5. Loraine Ritchey  |  November 13, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Mark I was so frustrated – their grading curve was what??? and I am so tired of the pontification

  • 6. aka/mozart  |  November 13, 2013 at 6:55 pm

    he will never apologize Loraine,,that is not of his character…because if it were..he would never have said that about dennis in council chambers.
    He is a useless piece of shit in my opinion…he couldn’t do half of what dennis does..but I perhaps suspect he must have an envy complex..or perhaps his shoes are just too small…lol..even if he has a big fat mouth..

    I do hope to see thou, more vacant slum houses come crashing to the ground…and along with those…the house on your street. I know I have a few here in my hood that could use a wrecking ball. I will keep a hope.

  • 7. paulatobias  |  November 14, 2013 at 3:07 pm

    Was just going through some old papers and found a study by Gould Assoc. 2008 a study on the Downtown Lorain Eligibility for Blight/Urban Renewal.
    72.6% of the buildings qualified or 146 parcels.

    And then I read a study for Water Front Development and the Lorain Port and Foreign Trade Zone.

    How many reports have been presented?
    How much has been spent on these studies and what are the results?

    I’m curious as to what benchmark they used on this latest study for homes? Iran?

    You know the saying, figures lie and liars figure.

  • 8. Dr Tammy  |  November 14, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    Although I was not at the meeting and have not seen the report, as someone who has had to present to a group that was none to happy with the data presented, I am interested in the researchers definition of A-F. If we are using the “normal curve” which most of us use, it would seem to me that 68% of the housing stock would fall into the C category. Now, C to most of us means 70% it doesn’t mean “average” unless it is defined that way. If they used a Lickert scale to score the housing, then it is a function of the definition of the range of the scale. All of this aside, as a developer or a company looking to locate in the Lorain area, housing stock being one of the measures used to make the decision, it becomes very important to the city that they “look” good and obviously, this is one way to do that. My feeling is, the city is trying to put on a good face and this study helps do that.

  • 9. Dr Tammy  |  November 14, 2013 at 3:23 pm

    Paula, can you email me the Downtown Lorain study?

  • 10. Loraine Ritchey  |  November 14, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    Exactly Tammy, and I know it is done ALL the time but there comes a time , as you know when real people are trying to face facts and clean up etc this was adding insult to injury ..please don’t rate our intelligence so low….. and it maybe a tool to bring in developers BUT all they have to do is come through the 2nd and 3rd and 5th ward and 6th for that matter to know the tint of the study was definitely tipped in rosy pink!!!! And there goes Lorain’s credibility AGAIN!!!

    It just stuck in my gullet .

  • 11. Loraine Ritchey  |  November 14, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    Don’t forget the “Historic Inventory Study, the Vision 1995, 2000, 2002 2020 the Welcome to Oz study , the 1975 Waterfront study , the Blight study from Gould in 2004/5 for this area. The ERA study the Staubach Report , I have a list somewhere there were 10 on that list and that was about 7 years ago……and hasn’t the Port also had studies….. SIGH!!!!!!!

  • 12. paulatobias  |  November 14, 2013 at 4:59 pm

    The study is in a hard copy.
    Can we arrange to meet and share?

  • 13. paulatobias  |  November 14, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    My Gould blight/urban renewal study is 2008 they must have recycled the 2004/5 study …… 😉

    We could do a study by just copying and pasting all the other studies, what do you think that would be worth? AND if you add those great pieces of “Clip Art” I know we could double the cost. :0

  • 14. Dr Tammy  |  November 14, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    my email is deleted …contact me.

  • 15. Loraine Ritchey  |  November 14, 2013 at 5:19 pm

    Oh no it was a separate study for Portside trying to blight the area under Foltin for an Urban Redevelopment Area- Renee I I were at the time heavily involved with the Kelo case ( and her fight eminent domain for private development- went to Washington etc. also then the Norwood case in Ohio.

    my sources tell me Foltin tried to have Gould re do the study twice when he told him it didn’t meet the blight requirement- luckily people had been fixing up the outside at least of their homes in Portside – and we had told the residents NOT to allow the “study group onto or into their property . anyway it didn’t meet the 51 percent criteria at the time . I hear Foltin fumed 😉

    Funny thing is that the area is also a Community Reinvestment Area since 1979 (YUP a CRA) 🙂 and a TIFF ( URDA) and a CRA cannot occupy the same area 🙂 personally I think they forgot at the time it was CRA area but of course Foltin was on his Casino get a seat at the table kick and get rid of Veterans Park to Veard …

  • 16. Loraine Ritchey  |  November 14, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    Tammy have deleted your person email for privacy and will make sure Paula gets it

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 230 other followers

November 2013

%d bloggers like this: