Foraker

It's obvious that you're both wrong. 😁 Lots of factors can influence growth in rural and urban areas, but political leaning is not a significant factor. https://equitablegrowth.org/gaps-in-u-s-rural-and-urban-economic-growth-widened-in-the-post-great-recession-economy-with-implications-amid-the-coronavirus-recession/ Urban areas worldwide tend to be more liberal than rural areas. The US is not unique. https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cities-conference/home

As to transit generally, 15-minute frequency is essential if you want riders. You can drive almost anywhere in Cleveland in about 45 minutes or less. If you just miss the bus had have to wait half an hour, why would you have any interest in taking the bus if you could afford a car? Maximizing 15-minute routes is as important as reliability. (And I agree that 15-minutes is not high frequency, but probably as much as we can expect given the population density in Cleveland.) Yep. Very few of those routes will have much ridership. RTA needs TOD.

LOL. It's the Ohio Constitution that requires "reliance on government schools" by requiring "a thorough and efficient system of common schools throughout the state." The backpack bill funds students, not "common" or public schools open to everyone. Maybe you're not a strict constructionist, but it might be getting a little late to start gathering signatures for your constitutional amendment before your Republican friends raise the bar.

Here's to more magic wands for everyone! I don't agree with all of your proposals, but I think there is a lot we could agree on. I hope that this is part of the long-term plan (next century, maybe not in my lifetime) -- moving the port to allow development to turn the corner and run from the Flats to the Rock Hall. (And from the Flats behind Tower City!) There has been some discussion of developing a container port near E55, but it may be difficult to completely move the bulk materials port from adjacent the mouth of the Cuyahoga. And we may want to maintain a passenger port near downtown. Times will surely change, so who knows. I still haven't been sold on closing Burke and making it a giant park. Just making Burke a park does not give Cleveland a world-class lakefront -- this will require a huge investment and I don't think it would be a catalyst to further investment. At the end of the day, I think we have a lot of higher priorities for our tax dollars. Yes, yes, and yes. Count me in.

Despite reports of funding for broadband above, Ohio continues to rank in the bottom of states for access to broadband. https://thehill.com/policy/policy_future-of-broadband/3988376-these-are-the-best-and-worst-us-states-for-broadband-access/

The utility company would benefit from the need for more generating capacity and/or more demand helping to drive prices higher -- so of course they want new places to deliver power to, particularly if they don't have to pay for it out of profits.

It now seems to have been settled that the Haslams are just going to renovate rather than rebuild. How long will those renovations last -- another 30 years? Where does the city want the stadium to be in 30 years? Now would be a good time to start acquiring land and doing the urban planning for that neighborhood if we want the stadium off the lake. How about an Opportunity Stadium Neighborhood that rivals Wrigleyville...

Could you have steps on one side and a ramp on the other to bring the land bridge itself down to a level just below the convention center windows -- or would that be too low to clear the freight tracks?

There are a lot of sources of social isolation/selective socialization (TV, Internet, Air Conditioning, Auto-mobility) that also contributed to sprawling development and Acres O'Parking. The Freedom Party loves it and doesn't want it to change. But sprawl is f*ing expensive! $1.07 B for Indy to maintain its infrastructure is a huge problem. They're still building further and further out and that bill is rising and the infrastructure is aging. Add in politicians' disdain for "maintenance" over ribbon-cutting and it's a recipe for infrastructure problems -- collapsing bridges, potholes, water main breaks, etc. Fiscal Conservatives need to educate the freedom-loving Republicans about ways to better balance their ability to have their own space without bankrupting the community. They're certainly not going to listen to "liberals" on the subject (and are there any liberals in Indiana?)

Update of sorts, current summary of University Heights projects already discussed above, expected to be (finally) moving forward this year. https://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/news/local_news/university-heights-projects-shot-in-the-arm-for-region/article_9123b026-e52c-11ed-a811-cf2c9c499f69.html

We need better (more frequent) transit in the Heights. Hopefully Top of the Hill and Cedar-Lee-Meadowbrook and the University Square development in University Heights can help make that happen on Cedar.

On paper that sounds great. In practice I doubt that any of these residents will be walking to many of those places because of the unpleasant walking conditions in the half mile surrounding it. There is no sidewalk on that south/west side of MLK toward Cleveland Heights. You have to cross the left-turn slip lane, then two or three lanes of traffic and watch a right-turn lane to get to the MLK sidewalk heading north, and then go down the sidewalk that hugs the hillside of MLK as traffic flies by just feet away. To go south toward Larchmere you walk past the water treatment plant and the large set-back of the medical building, and it is uphill to Larchmere. Going uphill (east) up Fairhill also requires crossing Fairhill and walking beside heavy traffic. I don't think there is any tree lawn separation in most of those places. Going downhill you will be walking beside the rapid traffic roaring up Fairhill or roaring downhill on MLK, and you have to cross Cedar and multiple lanes of traffic to get to Little Italy or Case. It does not seem like it would be very pleasant. It would be doable, particularly if you have an electric bike and take the sidewalk/path down to Case and back. But there is a lot that needs to be done to make it better. Under current conditions, I wouldn't want to do it. https://www.google.com/maps/@41.493636,-81.6032458,3a,75y,87.85h,71.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVe1wdiwAZl9ihm5kCrObw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.493636,-81.6032458,3a,75y,87.85h,71.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVe1wdiwAZl9ihm5kCrObw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.493636,-81.6032458,3a,75y,87.85h,71.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVe1wdiwAZl9ihm5kCrObw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.493636,-81.6032458,3a,75y,87.85h,71.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scVe1wdiwAZl9ihm5kCrObw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Looking good. But such an isolated location. There is nothing to walk to from there. That property should have been added to the park.

Agreed on the first point, but not convinced on the second. Ahuja and Tri-C East are surrounded by acres of nothing. Hard to say whether that is permanent -- if density is promoted and developed along the route to there, then it would be easier to justify the expense. I tend to agree with NR, rail beyond the inner ring suburbs is not high on my priority list. In part because their low density doesn't justify the expense. But if we can build up high-density, high-employment "nodes," then it may make sense to drive rail to them to serve the reverse-commuters. I'd encourage the suburbs to create those dense local "downtowns" if they want rail.

No intersection or street is identified in the twitter link.

I agree with you both -- given Cleveland winters, a subway might require less maintenance and would greatly speed transit times by eliminating issues with traffic and traffic lights. But I also agree with KJP, at least on the basis of cost -- building a subway line, while attractive for getting out of traffic and the weather, is far out of our reach right now. We should continue to emphasize development along the lines KJP proposed while we wait for those lines to be completed. FTOD (Future-Transit Oriented Development) Maybe when the sewer district is done digging overflow tunnels they can leave the tunneling machine(s) underground to dig subway tunnels. Any progress is better than none!

https://www.cleveland.com/community/2023/04/save-horseshoe-lake-supporters-file-demand-letters-with-cities-of-shaker-cleveland-heights.html Maybe a lawyer can weigh in here, but do the FOHL people have the right to force the parties to follow terms of the lease that the parties seem ok with not following? I have a hard time seeing how they can force Cleveland Heights to spend money on something that they don't want to spend any money on -- they're clearly in favor of the sewer district's plan to "take care" of the dam problem without spending any CH money. This would be a completely different issue if the City of Cleveland was insisting on some lease requirement, but they're not. Edit: Here is their website, with links to the letters sent to CH and SH. https://savehorseshoelake.com/

Blossom cost over $8m to build in 1967-8 (approximately $69m today) and only "seats" 6000. Plus another 15,000 on the lawn. Maybe something similar is going on here. Seats for 2-300 but a much larger total "audience" space.

Tough not to when the routes are so limited. Hopefully that will change. @KJP -- Has the military ever weighed in during these past 50 years of railroad consolidation and decline on the necessity of retaining trackage for national security reasons? I wonder whether they would they keep silent if the freight companies ripped out the rails between Minneapolis and Seattle, for example.

I can imagine a program, but it would require a lot of funding. Let the city/county/land bank buy properties from residents who are at a certain advanced age (at least 80 years old) and lets them live there rent free (utilities remain in their name). This doesn't seem that different from a tax abatement; and almost all of those rent-free agreements would end within 20 years -- few people live to see 100 and stay in their homes that entire time. The city/county/land bank would then be on the hook for maintenance, however. Ensuring that maintenance is done, and done well, could be the most challenging part (and defining "maintenance" -- when is the kitchen due for an upgrade? how often does the interior get repainted/re-carpeted, etc.). Would something like this work -- a long term plan, where for the first ten years the city/county/land bank would pay the CDC to set up maintenance programs for these rented properties, with the CDC's getting a percentage of the sale price of the property post-rental period, with a restriction that that money be used to help build future capacity so that the CDC could use the funds only for maintenance programs going forward once the initial ten-year period ends? If it is successful, expand the program to allow the CDC to fund other maintenance needs at low or zero interest to more residents of the CDC's neighborhoods.

That suggests that Philly should be investing in more transit police and social services.

That's some impressive biking. To facilitate rehabs, the land bank needs to get site control sooner. When the land bank doesn't get control until after there are structural problems, it's demolition time. How do we get there? Perhaps a strong exterior inspection program, to preserve the guts; and some means for taking over if the owner doesn't/can't keep up with maintenance. It might also help to require local agents for out-of-county owners, so they can't hide from service and let properties deteriorate so easily.

It seems like there is still a place for electric buses even with current shortcomings. School buses, for example, which run for a limited time and are idle much of the time, seem to be doing quite well and have been for some time. https://stnonline.com/news/calif-district-adds-to-largest-fleet-of-electric-school-buses/ They're only going to get better over time and better school buses could lead to better electric transit buses. For now, maybe electric transit buses make sense for similar situations -- a short run with lots of idle time to recharge -- special events perhaps.

Class 1 (must pedal) and class 2 (can ride throttle-only) ebikes are limited to 20mph. A good road cyclist can hit 20mph. I think these kinds of ebikes are actually good for getting older and less-abled people out of cars and onto bikes. Class 3 ebikes can hit 28mph (and probably can be modded to go even faster) and can either require pedaling or just a throttle. These are not permitted in Europe and probably should be classified with mopeds. https://bmv.ohio.gov/vr-firstissuance.aspx#collapseE I agree that larger, heavier bikes, with fatter tires, that can travel faster (and particularly class 3 ebikes) are more dangerous -- and should be required to have brakes that can stop from those speeds. There is actually a big lawsuit pending against one of the major ebike makers for a crash that killed a young girl in California when the brakes were insufficient. https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a42690937/molly-steinsapir-lawsuit-rad-power-electric-bike/

I would expect to see a difference in roadway maintenance expense after several years in a bike-heavy city vs. a car-heavy city. Some urban planning professor/student should look into that...