327

When I think Midwest I think west of Ohio, perhaps west of Chicago, but at minimum west of Cleveland. I see the Great Lakes region as a separate entity. Not sure which grouping MN fits into. I think you could make the case that Ohio is in 3 different regions, part Midwest, part Great Lakes, and another part in Appalachia.

Brand new park a block away, lots of residential already, in many ways it's a great site. Repurposing of the Grayhound station is almost a must though.

The comment sections there are not as bad as they're made out to be. There are a handful of overt racists who comment a heck of a lot, but otherwise it's pretty reasonable. I absolutely love this project. I love the location too, it's an area that should be built up a lot more than it is. That said, I pass by there a lot and my presence is rarely ignored, shall we say. And there appears to be at least one guy who resides on that stretch of sidewalk. I would suggest a strong DCA presence in the early going.

I'm a consistent booster of mass transit but in its current local state it can't be all things to all people. UC is well served by transit but the value of that is limited by the reach of the system feeding it, which is pretty sparse outside of UC and downtown. So yes, I really do think there's a need for a direct connection to the freeway system. I think it was discussed way back in this thread that a better truck route into UC from 490 would also help with developing industry in the affected area. Since part of that area's problem is an over-abundance of under-utilized industrial land, it really doesn't seem like a bad fit.

Definitely a rural pastime. Wasn't there a scene of that in Dazed and Confused?

Seems to have opportunist written all over him. When do we start hearing about policy proposals? I would prefer someone with more vision than Jackson, though do I applaud his fiscal accomplishments. I just don't know if Lanci is the right replacement. The web filter where I work won't let me look at his website, believing it to be "Games or Gaming Media." The only significant quote I've seen from him is that he wants to eliminate the traffic cameras. That's a policy I can get behind. But I wonder if he has a plan to deal with the lost revenue.

That's exactly what I'm saying, because the structural defects would remain. "Streetscaping" is a cosmetic approach to a much deeper set of problems. It will not solve poverty. It's something I would recommend many steps down the line from where we are right now. New housing would certainly help, but lack of housing is not what plagues this area. This area needs economic activity.

This sounds more and more like NIMBY every day. We can't make city and regional planning decisions on a block by block basis. That's what we've been doing and look where it's gotten us. Connecting UC to the freeway network will benefit the region, the city, and the east side in particular. It could also lead to more industrial development in an area that needs some, and where other development alternatives are tougher because of all the brownfields. New paving, landscaping, bike trails... none of that is going to help these neighborhoods the OC would pass through. Not in any meaningful sense. It will still be the same area with the same problems. There is concentrated poverty, crime, abandonment, no retail and no employment base outside UC/CCF. A new road isn't going to fix all that any more than a few bike paths will, but at least the road addresses a major regional need. This notion that every neighborhood has to get theirs is a big part of what's holding us back as a city. The best thing for Central and Fairfax right now, IMO, would be to take University Circle to the next level.

You're in luck, there already is one. And I agree with clvlndr to the extent that there's little sense in running buses on this when it parallels the Red Line. It's not like there aren't other routes that need those buses.

"WE'RE BROKE!" To be fair, the 3C plan had nothing to do with high-speed rail. It didn't even purport to be a first step toward achieving high speed rail. That doesn't excuse the Kasich administration's obvious failings re: transportation, but I don't think it does the pro-rail argument any favors to claim that 79 mph = high speed.

My experiences with this have been, as you say, predictable. Interesting issue though. I wondered what this guy had said to get Daniels so pissed off.

I really like Hot Fuzz, but opinions differ on that one. I agree with most of Hts121's comedy list although I would nominate Blues Brothers and a couple of Monty Python pix for it.

Sounds like a plan. I think the argument that this road would create Opportunity for adjacent residents is a stretch, so I'd like to see some component of the project just for them. I believe the project's potential value is substantial, but the value is not keyed to proximity to the ROW, while some of the potential negative effects might be.

Sounds great!

Pretty sure it's already illegal to do what these kids are doing. The social media aspect sounds like conspiracy, no?

Me too, but that seems politically unfeasible.

Things are definitely changing; until recently there was an annual festival. Personally I don't think canceling neighborhood events is a good solution to anything.

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS -- The city announced July 18 that Sunday's Coventry Family Arts Day has been canceled. A city release indicates the decision was made following police monitoring of social media and incidents at last weekend's St. Gregory the Great Festival in South Euclid. http://www.cleveland.com/cleveland-heights/index.ssf/2013/07/cleveland_heights_coventry_fam.html#incart_river_default#incart_m-rpt-2

For Johnny Westside I read "a large portion of the city and metro." And don't forget Jimmy Eastside, who may live in or near UC and wish to visit points west. The idea is to better connect the city as a whole, not to favor any one area, although the primary beneficiary is probably UC, which seems appropriate to me in the big picture. A stronger and more accessible UC strengthens everything around it. If the goal is to make people stop along the way between origin and destination, we can accomplish that by felling some trees. Or by changing nothing at all, since the current route is already stop-and-go. If the goal is to stimulate businesses in Central and Fairfax, I don't think roadbuilding is relevant. That goal can and should be addressed in a more direct fashion.

BRT is something to avoid going forward. And the whole idea of this is to provide a direct route to UC from the west and south, not to reinforce the current zig-zag arrangement. I will say that there seem to be an awful lot of lights in this most recent rendering. Can't help but wonder if some of those are there for the sake of impeding traffic as a gesture toward the "roads/highways are intrinsically bad" lobby, or if maybe it's mission creep as a gesture toward the Central/Fairfax lobby, or both. Either way, I think the project would be more effective with a few less lights.

I'm a brick enthusiast, but that design looks more like a hospital than a hotel.

Perhaps they see it that way, but IMO there's scant value in saying your new development is right next to a bad area. I think W6th and FEB are in this together.

More accurately, it remains a question with a questionable premise. We're there in some areas, yes. And more than many major lenders may appreciate, at that. But suburban development is far from extinct, and urban development is nowhere near a sure-fire moneymaker. There is a major, upscale mixed-use development in Downtown Akron that has been almost devoid of retail tenants, entirely devoid of non-anchor retail tenants, and well below 75% occupied in its residential units for many years now, and is an albatross around one of our most prominent local developers (one that would have the resources to pursue further mixed use urban projects if it had the inclination, but which has likely lost its appetite for such construction for a while). Seems like an overwhelming amount of this new development in downtown Akron is limited to student housing. Students have considerably less spending power than young professionals, who are de facto banned from utilizing these housing units that are practically tailor made for them. Rule #1 for attracting desirable tenants-- don't ban them.

The leadership will have to turn over. I don't see any other way, because they refuse to see any other way.

Ridiculous. Welcome to 1950. Zoning reform cannot happen soon enough.