327

The discussion on this point revolved around making the malls somewhere that suburban families would WANT to go on evenings and weekends. I was commenting on the statement itself, one that seems contradictory. Kinda like my "vibrant" pet peeve... failure to acknowledge that family-friendly and after-work are not at all the same constituencies. Efforts to please both could end up pleasing neither. Just a bit of bad writing. Halfway down the article it's made clear that these were two entirely different suggestions, which makes more sense. Any further details about the meeting? The item from the article that most caught my eye was the bit about public restrooms. Awkward to talk about... but necessary... restroom access is a factor I have to consider when planning outings with my parents.

Because everyone brings their kids & grandparents to work! This is probably our best option.

From everything I've heard, this entire show is premised on Cleveland's inferiority. I may be wrong, but I cannot imagine how it will do anything good for our image. The compliments it makes sure to give us will be ferociously backhanded.

Thank you for the spelling correction. If America's current intercity rail system works so well, then why the big to-do about rebuilding it? We can't have it both ways. Either the system needs an extensive overhaul, or the system is already a success. These two claims are not compatible. And we've had substantial discussions here about how Ohio's lack of local transit spending per capita IS unique, particularly among urban states. We can't claim that Ohio is obnoxiously and outrageously unsupportive of mass transit, and then claim that Ohio is equal and identical to states that aren't.

The quote was just for reference, in case someone posted in between. I suppose you didn't neeeeeeed to ask if I'd bothered to read the comment section. Note that I cut that part out. Don't get me wrong, I like what you did there. Very nice work. It's important for people to see that supporting rail is a sensible and mainstream thing to do. Those most likely to be swayed are the ones who didn't post anything, but they may read what others have posted, and they're better off encountering a balanced discussion. My point is (and has been) that comments like the one I highlighted tend to get lost in the firefight. That guy wants 3C to happen, and wants it to work, but he's frustrated that consumer perspectives don't seem to carry the weight they deserve. Meanwhile, the original letter is pimping 3C as "modern high speed passenger rail" and he's in for a sad trombone moment when he finds out that was dropped from the plan 20 years ago. The founding premise of ORDC was dropping "modern high speed" from the plan. I believe that was a huge mistake, and I don't believe anything in politics is ever a moot point. I'd be happy enough if Molitaris would make a public commitment to proving that this plan will be sufficiently useful for Ohioans who want to ride it... like our friend in Mansfield, who needs a reliable way to get from CMH airport to the station and from the Mansfield stop to his destination... instead of constantly reiterating how "successful" other systems are in other states. That's tangential. We're talking about this proposal, in this state.

Yes, of course. But I don't believe those people are all that persuadable, so I pray for the serenity to accept that I can't change such fools. I believe there are enough people who are supportive, or at least open to the idea... that the proper focus should be on pleasing them, on bringing them the rest of the way. In other words, don't get so pissed off at the haters that you miss this comment: ***** "Here's my take on the 3-C idea, and this is coming from a railfan. I think it could be a good thing, but only if done right. There are too many loose ends for this project. While Amtrak is supposed to have priority over freight trains, that rarely happens. Track capacity would need to be improved. Improving the tracks to increase speeds would reduce delays as well. Issues regarding transportation at the stops needs addressed since renting a vehicle would seem to reverse the benefits of taking a train. A realistic schedule that wouldn't leave huge gaps between train arrivals and give passengers more flexibility in terms of choosing when to ride. From what I've read on this topic, only a small number of trainsets are planned for the start up, which would leave huge gaps in the schedules. I've been hearing about the 3-C Corridor idea since the mid-80s. It just seems like they're running in circles doing the same studies over and over and ignoring the other concerns on this whole project."

From the letter: "I am writing to express my support for Ohio's proposed 3-C High Speed Rail System" "Only a modern high-speed passenger rail system connecting Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland will ease this untenable situation" Someone needs to educate the letter-writer too.

Parma is south/west, so I'd suggest focusing in that direction. Have you thought about Parma itself? No colleges there. Lakewood probably offers the widest variety of rentals.

I bet it gets used by east siders seeking nightlife in Tremont and OC. I doubt we'll see a lot of dense residential being built along this road, not if we can't get it on Euclid.

Same story in Lakewood too. Once you get past c17's needless claims and implications, one cannot deny the basic point he's making. Things are going downhill. It's a result of the region's increasing poverty and historical segregation. Doubling down on the "my side - your side" attitude will only make it worse. You can't build a wall big enough. You can't possibly hire enough cops justforyourblock. Well, maybe you can, but that doesn't really solve anything. The entire metro area rises and falls together. If you want CH, SH, UH to improve... you have to improve Woodhill and Mt. Pleasant. There is no other way. It's gone on long enough like this.

In both cases, charging a lower price could leave people with a better impression of the overall experience. Massive entry fees like these can result in unrealistic expectations.

Contractors are a powerful force. New construction, especially the ugly kind, is most favorable to them. The only question you need to ask is qui bono. If we don't stand strong behind a coherent vision for the city, and the state, we'll get run over. That's what's been happening.

You're absolutely right X. It just seems like we're having to put inordinate effort into proving that jelly is sticky and cows eat grass. U. G. L. Y. they ain't got no alibi they're ugly, these dorms. are. ugly.

Ghostbusters? I've had a lot of positive interactions with RTA employees, and have often found their work impressive, so I'm hesitant to place much blame on them as a whole. I would note though that ever since the route cuts, the Shaker trains have gone from pleasant to ramma-jamma almost overnight. There are enough female and elderly riders that I don't bother trying to sit down anymore, but sometimes there's not even really a place to stand.

I'd love to attend but that really is an impossible time slot. I have a feeling, though, that whoever does show up will make the same points I would have.

I made it up. Point being, nobody really cares about the true nature of the material. People care about the end result, which is the sense you get from looking at it. And clearly this stuff was meant to mimic vinyl siding, for reasons I cannot fathom.

Well, yeah, but that area is generally not considered part of downtown. Almost by definition. It's more of an anomaly than an examplar. I believe last week someone even created a "what's up with this area?" thread to bemoan its underdevelopment. And it's not seen as you approach on Euclid, which is supposed to be downtown's grand entrance from the east... arguably its most important entrance of all. People aren't going to do mass spectroscopy or whatever before their minds register a judgment upon viewing this scene. Man I wish I could post a picture.

RTA is spending money left and right, quite frankly on dumb stuff. I realize that not all funds can be apportioned to all uses. But in each case of federal capital support, RTA still has to spend some of our local money as matching funds, correct? Let's see... we're building the STJ transit center, we're installing noisemakers on everything that moves, we're erecting various new "shelters" all over the place, we're talking seriously about tearing up Clifton Blvd, and we have yet to officially step back from tentative proposals for BRT on 55th and Buckeye... all in the middle of a funding crisis. Seems like a matter of priorities more than anything else. Someone needs to step in and save RTA. Top management has failed disasterously and needs to be replaced. Soon we'll have a new county government... this gives me great hope.

and do you mean FEB or Frangos?

Perhaps not. I agree with Walker about why this move made sense. While I frown on "family friendly" motivations in a state that already trends too old and too staid, the Delphi location is as good as any in Columbus for a casino of this type. If Cleveland's were getting a prime downtown location, instead of a steep embankment that's never been developed, we'd all be upset about its inappropriate suburban look. Columbus has addressed this issue in a different way, but both cities have addressed it well.

Glenville, I share your concerns and I'm no less curious about what the deal is. Whoever solves this first... wins.

My concern, as an alumnus, is that CSU will be viewed as second class based on the impressions created by its architecture and material choices. I'm aware that this concern is somewhat superficial, but if appearance wasn't relevant we could replace architects with algorithms and save a lotta dough.

I'm not sure where people are getting their demand measurments here, but that's not the thread question anyway. The question is whether getting rid of zoning would lead to desirable developments. The answer: No. That doesn't even make any sense. If you zone for desirable development, and you enforce it, you eventually get what you want. Maybe not right away, but the alternative is getting what you don't want and getting it even faster. That outcome is two different kinds of bad. This is not complex. Cleveland's problem is not that it has zoning... it's that most of the zoning is outdated and suburban-oriented... and that when truly urban zoning is set up, a la Midtown, it simply gets ignored. If you want a certain outcome, it is insanity to bypass or eliminate rules that point directly to your desired outcome. So if you want something, and you have the capacity to make rules, then make your desired outcome the rule. If you want it but you don't do that, you have no business complaining when something else happens.

I'm not sure one man could have stopped the steel collapse. And he tried to, with his proposal to dig out Ashtabula County into a bay and give Youngstown its own port. Traficant was also right about the 711 connector, it was badly needed. Before that was built, you couldn't drive from Warren to Youngstown without creeping past every truck stop in the land on Salt Springs Rd. He also did more to keep his district informed about the business of congress than any representative anywhere. I like Tim Ryan a lot, but Traficant did not suck.

That's a great idea. Let's do it. Should have been done years ago. This is not a radical notion, this is common sense. There should be a deterioration tax too. With ownership comes responsibility. Nobody has they right to destroy Cleveland, regardless of wealth and regardless of market forces.