Foraker

Wish we were better at redeveloping existing structures -- could they find a way to add support columns within the existing garage and build above it? Seems like a waste of concrete to toss it all into a landfill. I suppose it depends on whether you have the right below-grade support for the final structure, but if someone had a way to do it I would think you could save a lot of time (eliminate tearing down the garage and building it again) and money in the process. You could be a hero...

Very happy to hear that Sustainable Community Associates will be working on this. Good fit for Cleveland Heights. Also like how they are going to spend some time to develop a master plan before beginning actual development. The city's economic development department could take a hint from this (should have taken some time to consider the Cedar-Lee business district as a whole and get community input before approving the development at Cedar-Lee-Meadowbrook; and should develop a plan for Severance before development occurs there).

In view of the recent move of GE Current from Nela Park in East Cleveland to Beachwood, I was thinking about how to make Nela Park more attractive to businesses. Extending the Red Line east to Noble Road might help bring workers to that industrial park. Windermere is just too far away (Google maps says that's a 40 minute walk; from the tracks by Noble it's about 17 minutes to the center of Nela Park). Which led to another thought -- wouldn't it be nice if municipalities and the county, when it comes to economic development, would invite RTA to the table. Or better yet, if RTA would reach out to municipalities to discuss their transit needs. Given the number of municipalities, it probably wouldn't happen every year, but every two or three years? Shouldn't "How can we help?" be part of RTA's business outreach to governmental units in the region? Maybe this is happening behind the scenes. But given the sorry state of East Cleveland, its proximity to booming University Circle, the presence of an existing rail line in close proximity, and an industrial park needing workers, extending the Red Line seems to be justifiable if EC, RTA, and Cuyahoga County could come together. And if Euclid and Cleveland got on board it could go even further. I hope someone from RTA and CC is reading these pages...

More about Al for those who don't know https://www.cleveland.com/faces-of-the-suns/2014/06/parma_man_and_amtrak_al_keep_t.html

Volpe's arguments that his design is dramatically better is standard Volpe -- considering that City Arch works for F&C on this project and may have restrictions that Volpe isn't aware of, that responses to RFP requests get minimal time from the architects, and he should know that City Arch hasn't invested a lot of time into the design and won't until F&C and the city sign a development agreement. Not to mention we still don't know whether the vacant buildings on Cedar Road will be part of this project. Very frustrated that the city still has not reached a development agreement with F&C these months later -- the economic development team needs to get off its *ss and get that deal done. Its failure to do so is leaving the field open for the "we want a park instead" crowd gathering petition signatures.

And hopefully they will find a way to extend it as well -- complete the loop!

And this is true of almost every municipality in Cuyahoga County -- mergers and consolidation of municipalities are not likely under current conditions. Shaker and University and Cleveland Heights could merge, but never will. Why should we expect anything different of EC? If the state and county were to seriously want to solve the EC "problem" I'm sure they could find the leverage to do so. But until then, EC will soldier on through its dysfunction. And maybe someday a long time from now will finally get its act together.

I completely agree that the added weight of a battery pack large enough to power a bus through a long day would be a lot of extra weight to carry around. But there are ways around this. Such as overhead catenary only at the bus stops for recharging, which would allow the bus to carry a smaller battery without having to run new catenary everywhere (something that would be cost-prohibitive in suburban Cleveland today). Another new technology is capacitive recharging, just like charging a phone by placing it on a pad the buses can be recharged from coils embedded in the ground at bus stops (and possibly at traffic lights). Safer than a "third rail." https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/abb-sells-first-order-for-15-second-bus-charging And battery technology is improving rapidly, much the way computer microprocessors did in the 1990s, gaining energy density and shrinking in size and weight. Electric buses are coming and will get better over time.

Which Ohio community will be the first to follow suit -- Kansas City requiring all new transit buses to be electric, hope to have fully electric fleet by 2030. https://www.kcmo.gov/Home/Components/News/News/1700/625

Where was the county’s department of regional collaboration on this? "Death by 1000 Cuts: Beachwood's Incentives for GE Current's Move from Nela Park Stabs East Cleveland Again"

This is a test -- that we can be pretty sure is going to fail. Brecksville is unhappy with the number of cars going over 90mph on I-77. So they are going to increase the fines for speeding. (Up to the levels of other communities in the area, apparently.) Is there less speeding in neighboring Broadview Heights or Independence? https://www.cleveland.com/community/2021/08/brecksville-may-increase-speeding-fines-as-more-drivers-exceed-90-mph-on-i-77.html As these excuses suggest, it's car design and roadway design determine speed, not the potential fine. Cars with a smooth ride, powerful engine, and quiet interior, combined with a wide-open highway with multiple lanes, slow curves, and long sight lines encourage higher speeds. I predict little reduction in speeding.

I completely agree that reconfiguring that Cedar hill-Cedar-Euclid Heights intersection is going to be an extremely difficult and expensive task and there are no easy or simple solutions. (Same for Cedar-Fairmount-Derbyshire-Grandview.) Pedestrians and cyclists crossing to Overlook is a problem. The no-stop right-turn coming up Cedar hill is a problem. Harcourt is a problem. It can really suck to be a pedestrian at some of these intersections. But I doubt that we could ever get a pedestrian bridge approved that would work well in this area. At least if you can get to the south side we now have a nice bike path down Cedar Hill and you can cross (if you can move quickly) at Murray Hill. And if you're on the north side you can cross Euclid Heights and have the median as a refuge. I'd want to think about closing Harcourt, eliminating the right-turn-on-red at the top of Cedar Hill, and adding a pedestrian refuge/median to help pedestrians cross Cedar -- far cheaper than a bridge (don't forget the maintenance costs on the bridge) "Don't crimp the flow of traffic!" is what gives us an ever-expanding highway system and the commensurate increases in maintenance expenses, and horrible "places" for pedestrians. No one wants to walk beside speeding traffic and its noise and pollution. I would redesign the street to slow the traffic down to 25mph while keeping it moving (fewer stoplights) (Driving through Little Italy isn't horrible, even though it can be slow, because generally you can move through). Slow but steady is better than fast with stop-and-go. That would probably be the best we could hope for.

Since it was the businesses there that banded together to pay for the jersey barriers, the businesses probably would rather have the outdoor dining space than the parking. Time will tell. Lively debate indeed -- people are still protesting Top of the Hill. I do like the idea of expanding the sidewalk in this area. Maybe you could allow on-street parking there in the new "curbside" lane after 5pm or something (most of the traffic is flowing toward UC in the morning and away from UC in the evening, so reducing traffic to one lane in the evening shouldn't be a problem -- as long as you manage the merge coming into the business district -- but that's no different than what we deal with at Cedar-Taylor).

You may be right about that. New mayor, lot of new faces on council, new city manager, new police chief -- a lot of change coming to CH government next year. I do think that the current "parking lane" being overtaken by the jersey barriers shows that that lane is not needed for traffic. And in fact I think its presence contributed to traffic problems as cars merged in and out. (Make cars change lanes before they enter the business district and as they leave the business district to limit the lane-changing within the business district and traffic should flow more smoothly.) So I hope we can keep that curbside lane as a pedestrian/outdoor dining space and improve upon it. I'd also still like to see some pedestrian refuges in the middle of the street given how wide the street is. I think those two things, while small really, would make a difference. I don't foresee having fewer than two lanes in each direction for the foreseeable future. Actually reducing lanes is a long-term endeavor that will require a lot of study and thought to do well.

I hope you turn out to be wrong about it never happening. I don't care if traffic backs up, there are alternate routes to relieve the pressure. The wide streets, lack of shade and lack of sidewalk activity depress business activity in this business district -- commuter routes (highways) don't bring revenue to the inner ring. Those commuters are just passing through. The city did not contribute to this project, it was all the merchants. The merchants who banded together to get the jersey barriers out and create some outdoor dining space have really done wonders for the pedestrian experience. I agree with everyone who says the street is too wide. The street really needs better pedestrian refuges in the middle. The traffic light situation is a mess too. I'd really like to see some creative engineering company review the traffic and redesign the street throughout this business district to make it a more pleasant place for pedestrians and cyclists. If we're going to wish lists, I'd also like to see a BRT line from the Cedar Hill rapid station out Cedar to Beachwood (or even better, a trolley and we bring back the rails in the road). We don't have the density to justify it now, but if the plan for such a line could be put on the table, with conditions that it's only going to happen once there are X,000 people within a half mile of some high percentage of the stops, then the cities along the route will have some justification for increasing density. Top of the Hill is going to help Cedar-Fairmount, and hopefully Cedar-Lee-Meadowbrook will be next.

And in other news, there were no hostage takers -- the jersey barriers were just temporarily removed from Public Square for cleaning and will soon be returned. Freshly power washed.... 😁

It's also a bastardization of the verse and shows a lack of understanding of Islam. https://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=9&verse=5 The Quran generally says that other monotheistic faiths that preceded Islam, particularly Jews and Christians, are "brothers" who should be treated well as long as they are not attacking Muslims. The Quran distinguishes such monotheists from "pagans" (polytheists, idol worshipers) -- but even then only if they do not repent and take up a practice of regular prayer.

Nice start. (But once you get Cincinnati and Louisville, why not Lexington? and then Lexington-Nashville?)

Check the link at the top of that post for a full list of cities https://mcusercontent.com/83058efadac7fd9d118aa89ee/files/5cf2973d-b8d2-2ef6-1558-1dc81ffdc229/2021_Ohio_Redistricting_Commission_regional_hearing_schedule.pdf

From a discussion about the sea of parking lots in the Cleveland central business district (CBD -- downtown). Assuming that a land value tax is not on the horizon, I suggest that another solution to an over-abundance of open air parking lots would be to restrict access of private vehicles to the CBD, narrow roads, reduce lanes, and close some roads to cars while permitting a more circuitous route -- i.e., attack the supply of vehicles that would make downtown parking lots convenient and profitable. Build a big garage adjacent the highway and a transit center to shuttle workers into the city center. Build better transit (complete the downtown rail loop!), build separated bike lanes, etc. And also increase a parking tax and use zoning and permitting processes to make open-air parking lots more difficult to operate.

This is an incredibly misunderstood truth. I cannot count the number of complaints I've heard about developers building "only" for the rich and new construction not including "affordable" housing.

Another opinion....

Thanks for that. Great summary of how we got here. And somewhat depressing the hurdles to be overcome. I think I'm probably in favor of nationalizing rail rights of way. Let the feds maintain the rails, like they do the highways, and possibly the control, like the air traffic control system, and leave private carriers to operate the trains. That's another high hurdle, however. The states like the property tax and too many people fear the "socialism" bogeyman, even though the freight companies are making every appearance of wanting to shed those assets.

Such an incredible waste... but a rounding error in waste in federal spending. 🙄 (largest expenditures are for the military and are unauditable)

The radius of the curbs at the intersection should be sharper to prevent speeders from making right turns without slowing down. Larger radius curbs at intersections are more dangerous for pedestrians.