327

Agreed.

When I clicked the Business Journal link, I was hoping for regionalism material and didn't find much of it. The PD version also mentions closing 3 prisons in favor of a "community-based system," also not bad. A Tale of Two Summaries.... let's see the plan itself. The business lobby would be a welcome ally for regionalism.

No wages = no discretonary income = no commerce. If the plan is to produce discretionary income through prvate sector job growth, that's wonderful. When will it take place? So far we've already put more $ in the pockets of busnesses via tax cuts, and we're about to slash state and local payrolls to close the resulting deficit. Doesn't seem too much to ask that said businesses start a-payin' sometime soon. When? By all means, commence commerce.

Most of those ideas amount to "lay people off" and/or "pay people less." That's no redesign of Ohio, it's just typical Chamber suggestions, most of which have already been granted or are currently underway. I have no doubt that some cutbacks are necessary at this point. But part of the reason for the deficit is Taft's massive reducton in business taxes, which I believe is now fully phased in, and these cuts are an inevitable part of that approach. On what sort of timetable are the tax cuts expected to draw business investment and create private-sector jobs? Does this trickle-down approach need to prove itself in any way? Because job losses in state and local govt, and the effects they have on local economies, won't be too hard to measure.

It might, but it wouldn't have to. I don't think we should build anything based on signal-timing unless the city agrees to actually do it. But they claim the BRT could do its run in 20-25 minutes, with proper timing, and it has twice as many stops as it needs. So if we get the lights right and cut down the stops, it seems possible to hit Collinwood in 30-45 minutes with a streetcar. Those are big ifs though. Are there any comparable routes in other cities that could give us an estimate? Another possibility might be running it along the route it's already on, perhaps with new track. No St. Clair TOD, but not much different from the current rapid service and probably cheaper to set up, even with new track. And that would be faster for sure.

That looks great. I'm glad this project is still going on, and I'd love to help out again as soon as my schedule opens up.

I'm sure others will jump on this... but if profit without subsidy were a requirement, there would be no transportation at all. Every mode receives subsidy and relies on it. However, I agree with heightsfan that some routes make more sense than others for HSR. I also agree that local and regional transit may be a better investment at this time, due to the fact that Ohio's so far behind in that area. Improving our local and regional mass transit would increase the efficacy of intercity rail here, high speed or otherwise. But I'm guessing Kasich has no interest in any sort of mass transit, so that gives us 4 years to plan things out. And when it comes to intercity rail, I still believe we should skip the freight-rail-sharing aspect as much as possible, and instead focus our resources on building dedicated HSR track.

I'd like to see a St. Clair line too, but not to Windermere. We already offer tons of service to Windermere and none along the waterfront. Why not end it in Collinwood, where there's neighborhood growth taking place and rail service is badly needed? Before we say that's too far for light rail, consider that the Green Line already goes as far east as Green Road. Follow Green Rd north to the lake and you're at E222nd. Green hits Euclid Ave between E152nd and E185th, so light rail to Collinwood doesn't seem like a stretch at all. Light rail is certainly not limited to 6-7 miles, and it makes no sense that an area within Cleveland city limits would only be reachable via commuter rail. We need to prioritize getting rail service to the Waterloo Arts District, which is a Tremont-in-waiting, and which needs a better lifeline than the #1 can provide. To clarify, we're talking about three different things now, all of which are technically extensions for the WFL: 1) downtown loop, 2) commuter rail to Painesville, 3) light rail along St. Clair. I'm sticking by my earlier point that commuter rail along the waterfront to Painesville would hook up the most people for the least money. As such, it could help us get the other two ideas approved.

Well, we wouldn't want to be ridiculous. Perhaps you misunderstood. I'm not talking about sending the blue line cars themselves to Painesville. But commuter rail could connect with the blue line at the current E 9th station, or eventually NCTC. That seems like the most cost effective method of extending the waterfront line. It might even raise the profile of rail transit in the region to the point that we could complete the downtown loop.

If the waterfront line is to be extended, let's do it on the waterfront. For one thing there's already tracks to use, which go past Waterloo and downtown Willoughby, then into Painesville. This would be a commuter line rather than a St. Clair streetcar. Running next to I-90 is a good thing, because the whole idea here would be to provide that commuting corridor with another option. Not a lot of potential for TOD in the immediate sense, but even as a "park & ride" it would still be a new selling point for a relatively dense 30-mile stretch of the region.

Excellent post ccars.

Me too. Let's proceed as if everyone is in fact aware of the recession/depression/GlobalLendingCrisis etc. Chances are that hasn't escaped us. And chances are we're also aware that there's no magic button for such things. Even in this environment, or the previous one, it's still possible for mistakes to be made by developers and policymakers. And it's also possible to make changes. None of those changes will bring about a magic button. But they can increase our chances of success, now and in the future. Looking around this city, and comparing it to others similarly situated, it's evident that changes are needed. There are a lot of things various levels of government could do to help make the Avenue District flourish. Upgrading East 12th street was certainly one of them. Perk Park was another. Jumping on the developers who left a pile of filth by the townhouses was yet another. Are there any more? What have we not tried? What DO we have besides no? How bad DO we want it? What are we willing to do to make it happen, regardless of the timeline? "Wait for the banks" is a valid answer, but as noted, it's not like anyone gets a nickel for every time we use it.

I understand the funding sources better than you might think. The complexities of it are indeed off topic and I wasn't trying to get into them here. Long story short, there are rules and there are holes in them. There are alternatives. Cleveland is not required by law to spend this money on this park, and even though I wouldn't mind seeing this plan happen, it's a questionable expenditure right now.

Agreed, this should have been part of the bailout. Although it also wouldn't hurt to nurture startups in industrial areas for this purpose. Then we have GM plus a new rail industry!

I've been inside Tower Press, at least the common areas, and it's super cool.

What does the school have to do with this? Not a damn thing. I'm pretty sure that if the budgetted number is not used, any remaining funds can not/will not be allocated to the schools. The schools are a responsibility of the City of Cleveland and are underfunded. The parks are another responsibility of the city and they appear to be overfunded, given the crisis in the school system. Parks and Rec should not have to "burn off" appropriations with needless projects at a time when the schools can't keep teachers on board. For the most part, money is fungible. All budgetary decisions, specific and general, are made by the elected officials in Cleveland City Hall. It does not appear to me that they have their priorities straight at this time. Cleveland does not have an imploding park system, it has an imploding school system. And this park in particular is plenty functional as is. Vendors, musicians, crowds, the works. Could it be improved? Of course. Does it need to be? No. If your car has a dead battery and a perfectly good paint job... you don't solve that with a new paint job.

Good points on the financing McCleveland, and it sounds like condo regulations could use some cleanup. Bottom line is I love this building and I hope it can fill up soon. I'm glad Zaremba took the chance on building it and I wish things had worked out better for them so far. I do think part of the problem is the business model, but that's crying over spilt milk at this point. What's done is done. Every market needs a high end and here's ours. Now, if they want to fill it up, they might consider partnering with someone who'd put some mid-range apartments nearby. The immediate area needs to get less desolate. I can't believe the current occupants would be so inimical to market rate renters when there are already projects and homeless shelters (and a public university) right down the street. The issue with rentals is that there aren't enough of them, particularly of the type that's in demand. I understand what the stats say, but they ignore the fact that many of these rentals do not meet the specific demand for modern one bedroom apartment units. It really is a problem and it holds back downtown's growth. In trying to draw new residents into a troubled area like inner-city Cleveland, it does help to reduce barriers like down payments and lifetime financial commitments. Try before you buy. It's not that condos are bad. It's just that we don't have enough of the type of rentals we need, the type that people are lining up for.

I suppose you're right, but this is not at all the sort of public-private partnership I've been talking about. This involves giving private developers control over explicitly public spaces, and to an extent, public funds. That's the opposite of a traditional public-private partnership, in which the public takes a more active hand in development. Parks aren't development, parks are a public function. Hence the trepidation with putting developers in control of it. They each have personal interests which may conflict with those of the public. This issue is not entirely dissimilar from that of privately-controlled traffic enforcement cameras. Some things are public for a reason, and I don't like it when the line is crossed. Then again, I don't think this is a major issue, just an eyebrow-raiser.

Can't imagine why it's not selling.

I didn't realize being on a design panel required capital and business/political connections. That kind of thinking has gotten us in trouble before. Hint: conflicts of interest. I like Dan Gilbert, his philosophies and his actions, but I would prefer a more professional approach to planning and landscape design. Actually, it's about both. To wit: A huge part of the panel's job (if not its primary job) will be to round up private funding for the public spaces, and in order to get wealthy folks and corporations to open up their pocketbooks, you need folks on the panel with these connections. OK that makes more sense, although those are two very different jobs.

In fairness, Dan Gilbert could sign with the Knicks or the Bulls as of 12:01 tomorrow, so we'd better ingratiate ourselves as much as possible.

NOACA isn't a charity... and that quote refers to the $75k transportation planning study rather than the park, for which Cleveland itself has budgeted $1.5 million per the PD article. Two separate things.

The composition of this panel suggests that it's less about the project succeeding and more about the mayor succeeding.

Ha, I saw them taping this yesterday and wondered what the story would be. Hopefully PC will work on rebranding so they can come back stronger after the move.

Not saying the existing building should convert to rentals. On that we agree. I'm saying future additions should be rentals. The condos and townhouses would probably sell better in a completed development full of people. Right now the St. Clair block smells of failure and that's not good for anybody. I do not think the problem here is credit and credit alone. The business model of forcing people to mortgage their way into downtown-- not just in the AD but overall-- needs to be reexamined. Potential renters are being turned away from downtown left and right, even in this economy. Meanwhile condos sit empty. There's plenty of demand but that demand is not for 30 year commitments.