Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Urban Studies and Planning Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Urban Studies and Planning

Cleveland’S Slavic Village: Stabilizing A Neighborhood Hit Hard By The Foreclosure Crisis (2006-2017), W Dennis Keating Sep 2018

Cleveland’S Slavic Village: Stabilizing A Neighborhood Hit Hard By The Foreclosure Crisis (2006-2017), W Dennis Keating

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

Cleveland’s Slavic Village (and Broadway) is a neighborhood on the southeast side of Cleveland bordering the industrial valley. It grew with the arrival of European immigrants attracted by the jobs in the factories in the adjacent valley. Centered at Broadway and East 55th Street, the bustling neighborhood had commercial strips and churches serving a growing population. The total population peaked at 60,257 in 1950. As de-industrialization occurred in post-World War II Cleveland, so too did it affect Slavic Village as jobs left. By 2000, its population was about half (30,524) of what it had been half a century earlier. However, …


Ten Years Of Foreclosure Prevention In Cuyahoga County, Molly Schnoke Jul 2017

Ten Years Of Foreclosure Prevention In Cuyahoga County, Molly Schnoke

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

No abstract provided.


Responding To The Mortgage Crisis: Three Cleveland Examples, W. Dennis Keating, Kermit J. Lind Jan 2012

Responding To The Mortgage Crisis: Three Cleveland Examples, W. Dennis Keating, Kermit J. Lind

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Just as SVD [Slavic Village Development] fought back against predatory lending, mortgage fraud, and speculator flipping, the City of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County also sought to prevent these practices and stem the rising tide of foreclosures. This included legislation, litigation, and homeowner counseling. This article will focus on three examples of the response to the mortgage crisis in Cleveland: the Cleveland Housing Court, the Cuyahoga County Land Reutilization Corporation (land bank), and community development corporations (CDCs) and local intermediaries (namely, the Cleveland Housing Network (CHN) and Neighborhood Progress, Inc. (NPI)). Each of these entities has developed initiatives aimed at the …


Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County, 2010 Evaluation Report January 1, 2010 Through December 31, 2010, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke Jan 2011

Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County, 2010 Evaluation Report January 1, 2010 Through December 31, 2010, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

No abstract provided.


Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County, Interim Evaluation Report January 1, 2009 Through December 31, 2009, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke Jan 2010

Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County, Interim Evaluation Report January 1, 2009 Through December 31, 2009, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

No abstract provided.


Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: Program Year Three Evaluation Report, March 1, 2008 Through February 28, 2009, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke Jan 2009

Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: Program Year Three Evaluation Report, March 1, 2008 Through February 28, 2009, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

Cuyahoga County, Ohio is at the epicenter of the foreclosure crisis. With close to 13,000 foreclosure filings a year since 2005, more than 10,000 vacant and derelict structures and thousands of homeowners losing their homes, the effects of the crisis will be long lasting and far reaching. In Ohio, County courts, agencies and departments have some level of authority and responsibility for virtually every step of the foreclosure process. So it is not surprising that the fifteen mayors of the First Suburbs Consortium2 turned to Cuyahoga County to help them address this crisis. In response, in August 2005, the Cuyahoga …


Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: A Pilot Initiative, Interim Report, Alan C. Weinstein, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke May 2008

Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: A Pilot Initiative, Interim Report, Alan C. Weinstein, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke

Law Faculty Reports and Comments

The Center for Civic Education and the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law released their report, on May 12, 2008. The report, prepared for the Cuyahoga County Board of Commissioners, is an assessment of the County's comprehensive approach to addressing foreclosures on two levels: 1) Making foreclosure proceedings faster and fairer and 2) Creating an early intervention program to help residents prevent foreclosure.


The Sky Isn’T Falling Everywhere, Brian Mikelbank, Charlie Post, Ivan Maric Jan 2008

The Sky Isn’T Falling Everywhere, Brian Mikelbank, Charlie Post, Ivan Maric

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

This report looks at the consequences of treating Cuyahoga County’s housing market as “one market” versus a shrinking but relatively price stable market and a submarket plagued by abandonment and foreclosure. Brian Mikelbank was interviewed about the study on WCPN. org on Tuesday, November 11, 2008.


Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: An Assessment Of Progress, Alan C. Weinstein, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke Nov 2006

Responding To Foreclosures In Cuyahoga County: An Assessment Of Progress, Alan C. Weinstein, Kathryn W. Hexter, Molly Schnoke

Law Faculty Reports and Comments

In August 2006, Cleveland State University was asked to conduct an initial assessment of the Cuyahoga County Commissioners' Report and Recommendations on Foreclosure that would assist the county in planning for future phases of the project. This report presents the findings of this initial assessment of the first 18 months of the initiative. It documents the process undertaken by the county, assesses the progress made toward reaching goals, identifies successes and concerns, and offers some preliminary recommendations about program operations. It also offers suggestions for a more formal evaluation process going forward