327

At that point making them use the machines would take longer, wouldn't it? They're standing there, they have the cash, there's a box right in front of them. The whole BRT/POP thing was never going to work well using the fare machines RTA chose to purchase. That was a devastating error and we're still paying for it.

I usually avoid it but I don't always have a choice. And the innerbelt fares even worse. With recent work on the 176 ramp, the innerbelt lanes of 90 are sometimes backed up beyond city limits in the morning. The 490 lanes usually breeze through until you get near 55th, but if that's backed up you can see it from a distance and switch to 77 north, then get off at Woodland/30th and bypass the whole mess.

You assume getting to the innerbelt is easy but that's not always true. The idea here is allowing UC traffic to bypass downtown traffic. Even now, 55th is frequently gridlocked. 490 and Woodland will both back up for a mile with people trying to turn onto 55th. We're asking the current street grid to perform in a way it was not designed for. And sending UC traffic through the innerbelt asks the highway system to perform in a way it was not designed for. I know traffic is worse elsewhere but Cleveland's traffic should not be as bad as it is. The OC project should alleviate a lot of grief, even for people who aren't using it, because it will remove cars from other routes where they don't belong. Edited for UH/UC typo.

Still like that in Cleveland too. Lots of small-time older landlords.

The primary beneficiaries of this project are the uptown and heights areas. And whatever benefit is provided to west side commuters is also provided to all visitors arriving in Cleveland, from every direction except the northeast.

I used to work there and the views are great. Always thought it would have been better as apartments. The garage is really crumbly. I had hoped we'd see something in that John Q space by now. Think of how many apartments are on that block now, just counting the Standard alone.

My point is we don't have everything Austin has. Our assets are different, but we do have assets and we need to maximize their value. Dell could have gone anywhere at any time but they like what Austin has to offer. Cities outside the sunbelt, that don't have favorable weather, tend to compete on the basis of their culture and their built environments. And some of them do it very well. Again, this isn't about neighborhood quality alone solving every problem we have. But unless we improve neighborhood quality, it will be very difficult for us to stem the population losses. Our neighborhoods are in such awful condition that they are driving away the destitute. Don't get caught up in Nirvana Fallacy, rejecting solutions that are necessary just because they're not sufficient.

Semi-related, this story highlights an instance of Vibrant Greenspace policies doing harm to industrial businesses. At the end it says Towpath planners tried to accommodate concerns raised by the businesses, but suggests there was only so much they could do when ramming their project through an active industrial area was the overwhelming priority. Some of the business concerns seem more significant (truck access blocked) than others (parking reduced). https://www.cleveland.com/expo/erry-2018/05/027210fffd4281/towpath_trail_extension_troubl.html#incart_m-rpt-1

It's not so much a moral/ethical dimension but one of competent policy and management. Speaking of Austin, much of its modern reputation is attributed to its live music culture. Cleveland collects a special tax on live music venues and allows a certain fun-averse activist to run around town shutting down parties with esoteric (but technically valid) zoning and building complaints. If we want to see Austin-like growth here, we should be boosting our local music culture rather than attacking it like John Lithgow in Footloose.

The real problem is we ran out of superfund. Removal should still be prioritized over containment. But I agree that CERCLA reform would do wonders for cities like Cleveland.

Columbus has added a lot of density in the past 15 years. That number will continue to rise.

I didn't mention the mayor because a lot of this predates him. It's a matter of policy, it's bigger than any one office or person. Do you really believe neighborhood quality is irrelevant to population losses? We need to stop focusing on factors we can't control and do a better job with the ones we can. We can't expect outsiders, from Washington or from Wall Street, to come in and fix up this mess. That is for locals to do, with whatever resources we have available. And we do have resources here, but the policies that determine how we utilize them have got to change. Rebuilding neighborhoods the way we did in Central will not lead to growth. By and large, people are not seeking that kind of living arrangement in that kind of area. People who might consider relocating to an inner city are instead looking for density and walkability. We can choose to build marketable urbanity, or we can choose not to, but we can't blame anyone else for the choices we make about what kind of community we want to be. Everything you’re saying is absolutely true. But I think what X is getting at is that the larger economic factors have much more impact than any local-level decision making. Cleveland didn’t get big because of sound urban planning policy. Location and industry built it and location and industry decimated (x6) it. What does our location say to industry right now? We're known for ruined neighborhoods and obstructionist government. But we also have a lot of historic building stock that few cities can offer, and that sort of thing happens to be popular again. So we can choose to become the best location we can be, making the most of what we have, or we can keep assigning godlike powers to outside forces and refusing to accept responsibility for our own choices. I never said that managing our community competently would solve everything. That's a straw man. But do you think it would hurt? Why not give it a try?

I didn't mention the mayor because a lot of this predates him. It's a matter of policy, it's bigger than any one office or person. Do you really believe neighborhood quality is irrelevant to population losses? We need to stop focusing on factors we can't control and do a better job with the ones we can. We can't expect outsiders, from Washington or from Wall Street, to come in and fix up this mess. That is for locals to do, with whatever resources we have available. And we do have resources here, but the policies that determine how we utilize them have got to change. Rebuilding neighborhoods the way we did in Central will not lead to growth. By and large, people are not seeking that kind of living arrangement in that kind of area. People who might consider relocating to an inner city are instead looking for density and walkability. We can choose to build marketable urbanity, or we can choose not to, but we can't blame anyone else for the choices we make about what kind of community we want to be.

A lot of investment (and time) has been squandered over the last couple decades on bad planning and mistaken priorities. Policies must change. No more height limits, no more parking minimums. No more blunders like building a giant school along the hottest section of Detroit Avenue. No more McMansions in Hough. No more grassy setbacks, no more roads fronted by another road. No more new buildings made of trailers-- we have elegant historic retail spaces all over town that need repair and we are going to repair them. Focus on the ones near transit stations because retail is an essential aspect of TOD that we keep ignoring. Doing things the right way matters, because doing things wrong leads to bad results. Downtown and uptown have improved so much but there's been minimal spillover to surrounding neighborhoods. It's time to admit that isn't getting us anywhere and a new focus is needed. The neighborhoods need direct investment, they need more businesses in them. And to the extent they need rebuilt, they must be rebuilt in a format that is dense and walkable and above all marketable.

That's what the plan is though I would hesitate to list Central as a success story. Cleveland needs to decide what kind of city it wants to be. We're guided by inconsistent visions while Columbus has settled on a path of mixed use and core density. Columbus runs radio ads in Cleveland asking us to come experience their walkable neighborhoods. Cleveland is still tearing them down and replacing with suburb. No end in sight for that policy. I'd like to see a clear and sensible plan established first, then demo. Sensible plans might even involve less demo.

You can't be all policy, you have to mix in some aspiration. Maybe we can't get a 100% freeloader fee right now but at least we're talking about it. And maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle. Like when your job says "we know you can't live off this but we're getting there, aren't we?"

You can get an all-day pass for the transit system any day. Unfortunately there's some maintenance planned for this Saturday, so a chunk of the system east of Tower City will be replaced by buses. If you want to go from downtown to the museums, you might be better off switching to the Euclid Avenue fancy bus. http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/track-maintenance-week-51318-51918 Here's the departure schedule: http://www.riderta.com/routes/redline/schedules/current

Kenyon and Denison are off the radar for most people. Even with scholarships you can end up with serious debt. I grew up near Denison and parents' weekend would fill the town with exotic sports cars. These schools serve as backups for coastal blueblood kids who can't get into anything fancy back home.

This seems cool, but I hope they're not putting these where apartment blocks used to be.

The Mass plan looks very 1960s but that may be intentional. Not clear why they're so against the mixed use concept. Litt calls that a "hybrid" as if we're splicing alien genes.

UPDATE: Whitney Young has been saved, at least for now, after its students went to meetings and campaigned for it to stay open.

Agreed, but the solution was not to build a desert metropolis where all the laws are different.

That's correct. There is currently nothing blocking a blue line extension. Good. So let's cancel the garage plan. Let's go ahead and take that right off the table because we understand the importance of expanding our transit network. And let's put some guidelines in place at RTA to make sure nothing so foolish ever gets this far again. Here in Cleveland, we don't even consider blocking our rail lines. That would be absurd.

My understanding was that the Blue Line has been effectively blocked off by a new parking garage.

They're just taking 37 and tripling it. In other words, 'We'll triple our rail infrastructure". So... no further thought was put into it and no expansion plans exist.