If this new road causes one factory to open in Central employing one person, I would rate it a success.

 

I really hope you're exaggerating. :)

If this new road causes one factory to open in Central employing one person, I would rate it a success. 

 

I wouldn't go that far, but I see your point that there's really not that much that this road will disrupt.

 

If the road does cause some little bit of development of the neighborhood, which would require this road to be built with intersections and not be a freeway, it'll be an improvement to the neighborhood. If one factory opens, it'll be a success for the neighborhood, but still a waste of taxpayer dollars.

That's my point exaclty Grumpy.  This road may not be able to harm this neighborhood much more, but I think its a pretty dubious claim that it will help the neighborhood, especially knowing the way ODOT likes to build roads and the respect they have for neighborhoods in their path.  Even if there are some small successes, though, the biggest reason I can't stand this project is that I think there are much better ways we could be spending this money.

That's my point exaclty Grumpy.  This road may not be able to harm this neighborhood much more, but I think its a pretty dubious claim that it will help the neighborhood, especially knowing the way ODOT likes to build roads and the respect they have for neighborhoods in their path.  Even if there are some small successes, though, the biggest reason I can't stand this project is that I think there are much better ways we could be spending this money.

 

100% agree!

A lot of the focus is on bringing people into the circle, but does this potentially have the chance of becoming another flight from the city like the first round of highways caused (although on a much smaller scale)??

Im worried about the people who live and work in the circle. I dont want to see people currently living there to suddenly move out and into the suburbs because now they can easily drive to and from the circle each day from the suburban home.

Considering the range of options those folks already have, I'm not worried that they will suddenly up and leave UC because of a 5-10 minute quicker commute to Avon.

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/05/opportunity_corridor_steering.html

 

Opportunity Corridor Steering Committee faces challenge in balancing transparency, impact

Posted by Steven Litt / Plain Dealer Architecture Critic

May 22, 2009 09:19AM

 

 

Despite its massive problems, Cleveland never lacks opportunities to turn itself around. A big new one that's revving up now is named, fittingly enough, Opportunity Corridor.

 

The issue, as always, is whether the city can rise to the occasion. Given Cleveland's batting average over the past half-century, the odds are very mixed...

 

He asks some very good questions. I really hope Cleveland does well with this project.

^ Very much so.  The very last thing Cleveland needs with this project is another road that's designed merely to move cars from Point A to Point B through a soul-less car-centered development.  It needs to encourage bike-able, walkable, human-scale development. 

 

Currently I'm in the Nashville area, which, unless you live along the new commuter rail line, you absolutely cannot get there from here without a car.  Wide, multi-lane streets flanked by ugly strip-malls abound.  Too much of America is characterized by this unsustainable, useless-without-a-car ugliness. 

I am not sure if this has been talked about on this thread or others, but what would the cost be to incorporate a light rail system onto a newly constructed street?

I am not sure if this has been talked about on this thread or others, but what would the cost be to incorporate a light rail system onto a newly constructed street?

I know KJP has drawn some maps upthread on shifting some rail to the median of the OC, but I don't think anyone has taken the ideas seriously enough to put together a price.

I think $40 million per mile to add the Red, Blue & Green Lines is a reasonable amount considering that a graded right of way (in the boulevard's median) would be provided by the highway. The median would have to be about 60 feet wide (the same as Shaker Boulevard's west of Warrensville) to fit a two-tracked rail line with landscaping in it. Anyway, the distance of newly built rail line is about 2.5 route miles, so the cost could be about $100 million.

Thanks, I hope the "new" ODOT is looking at this

Isn't the road suppose to run within blocks of the red line for most of the distance?

Yes. The Red Line runs in a trench that's dark, feels unsafe and shared with freight trains, abandoned industries and vacant, toxic lands. It was a dumb idea to put it there in the first place (but it was cheap and expedient). This is an opportunity (there's that word again) to fix this mistake.

So if the OC gets a light rail system there will be three major mass transit routes going from downtown to University Circle.  Not that I don't want options, but for 2 nodes that are only 4 miles apart it would seem to be a bit much.  Now if I had faith in the development pattern for this Opportunity Corridor it may make sense to have it, but office parks and strip malls along the route don't necessitate light rail.

Give me a little credit for being more reasonable than that. Here's the proposal....

 

http://members.cox.net/peepersken/OpportunityCorridorRapidREV.pdf (2mb)

KJP, very nice work on this. Outstanding. I am more stoked about the OC than ever before. Having gone thru ODOT's proposal, a LightRail possibility is barely mentioned. What do you think the odds are that rail will receive serious consideration. And if it would be considered should we be concerned that it might set the project back even more while this would be discussed.

Also for those of you who have fears about the OC, a very similiar project just completed would be the Crocker-Stearns extension in Westlake. If you take a drive on that I think you will get better idea of what is being proposed.

KJP, very nice work on this. Outstanding. I am more stoked about the OC than ever before. Having gone thru ODOT's proposal, a LightRail possibility is barely mentioned. What do you think the odds are that rail will receive serious consideration. And if it would be considered should we be concerned that it might set the project back even more while this would be discussed.

 

I have very little hope that a consolidated rail line will be included in the median of the OC.

 

Also for those of you who have fears about the OC, a very similiar project just completed would be the Crocker-Stearns extension in Westlake. If you take a drive on that I think you will get better idea of what is being proposed.

 

I think that's exactly what we're afraid of! We seem intent on turning the countryside into suburbs, the city into the countryside and the suburbs into the city. We need dense, pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use city neighborhoods that can be reached without a car. Thus I would instead prefer this transportation/land use paradigm for the Opportunity Corridor....

 

 

KJP, love the proposal but gotta ask-- would you consider updating the development aspect of it to apply to Euclid Corridor instead of Opportunity Corridor?  I just can't fathom putting industrial compounds on Millionaires' Row while adapting a 100-year factory zone for upscale residential.  Seems backwards.  Seems like it would cost billions more in the long run than would flipping the plans and sticking with the historical character of each area.  For all its problems, Euclid Ave has about 10x the chance of looking like those pix than Central/Kinsman ever will.

KJP, what would you give odds on a BRT being included in the OC?

I don't propose putting industrial compounds where Millionaire's Row stood, nor would I want to.

 

And, if you look at the proposal, it has mixed use around the Opportunity Corridor boulevard stations which are focused at the major intersections. The industrial/warehousing would be located away from the stations.

 

What we're all missing here is that there is already rail transit in this corridor. The two existing lines won't benefit from having sprawling warehouses and single-level factories whether they remain where they are or if they are consolidated into the median of the Opportunity Corridor boulevard. But what I do know is that the boulevard median is a more secure setting for stations. It's a lower-cost right of way to operate and maintain than the two separate lines with their many bridges, multilevel stations and aging retaining walls. It offers the opportunity of more intimate development patterns around its stations compared to those located next to wide, sub-grade freight railroad rights of way. And it offers a better joint station facility location for all three east-side Rapid lines and proposed regional commuter rail.

 

Doesn't matter anyway. RTA is happy where they are and is more interested in putting express buses from the suburbs on the Opportunity Corridor. So we end up with more transit capacity in a corridor where the rail transit lines are already underperforming. Anyone else see the problem here?

KJP, what would you give odds on a BRT being included in the OC?

 

I don't know about BRT, but certainly express buses from west-side suburban park-and-rides. RTA has already indicated their interest in this.

I don't propose putting industrial compounds where Millionaire's Row stood, nor would I want to.

 

I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.  But someone has indeed made such a proposal and is attempting to run with it.  Your vision for OC, as detailed above, is not far off of my vision for EC.  Quite similar, really.  Obviously your rail restructuring plan is particular to the OC area, but the TOD aspect of your proposal seems widely applicable. 

what you mean his vision of mixed use?

The problem is that nobody is working towards a large scale idea of "city building."  The people in charge of these projects rarely seem to look at the city as a system of interconnected and interdependant nodes in lue of focusing strictly on their ward, or highway project in this case.

bingo.

what you mean his vision of mixed use?

 

Yes, as illustrated in his proposal diagrams and in those photos. 

 

I think the only issue we differ on is how much biotech or other industry would ever be housed in that sort of arrangement.  Having some expertise in security and hazmat, I'd suggest the answer is little to none.  I believe it was the Offspring who once said you gotta keep em separated.  "Mixed use" can't ever mean putting a metal stamping operation in (or near) an apartment complex, or the very concept of mixed use will be discredited.

 

This is why I'd prefer to focus the Opportunity Corridor entirely on hi-tech industry and bioscience, while putting the population density elsewhere.  I'm all about mixed use, but we certainly wouldn't want to test jet engines or breed mutant viruses in the middle of a residential/commercial/office development.  Do we?  I'm not sure it would be legally or commercially viable even if we did want that.  Is that what you mean by mixed use?  It's not what I mean by mixed use.  Part of the reason the OC section of town is so screwed now is that factories and houses there were thrown up willy-nilly amongst each other, in such a way that they both reduced each others' value. 

 

I am NOT suggesting a suburban-style total separation of everything... merely a separation of industry and secret research from everything else.  I think that makes our industrial and secret research zones far more marketable, than would giving them noise and chemical restrictions to protect adjacent condos.  With industry happy in its little home, I wholeheartedly agree that everything else should be stacked and packed as densely as possible.

I think that's exactly what we're afraid of! We seem intent on turning the countryside into suburbs, the city into the countryside and the suburbs into the city. We need dense, pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use city neighborhoods that can be reached without a car. Thus I would instead prefer this transportation/land use paradigm for the Opportunity Corridor....

 

In comparing the two I was not suggesting that we turn Cleveland into Westlake. What I meant to point out is how well that project fits within that space. I understand Clevelands urban setting will require a much different approach. I think your example above is a bit extreme considering that much of this road will run through an already mature neighborhood. And we need to consider those who make that there home.

This is what you call a mature neighborhood....

 

 

This is what you call a mature neighborhood....

 

..uhm...yeah. Looks like a fair amount of older residential too me. What am i missing?

You don't build freeways around rail, you put rail in the middle of existing  freeways, sometimes, where the urban area is dense and cheaper right-of-way alternatives don't exist  (ie Chicago)... And even then, rapid tansit and freeways are contradictory in terms of the type of development they attract.  Chicago's best use of transit in freeways is where there is no freeway interchange at the transit stop, and the freeways is, to the extent it can be, built in a way not to disrupt the dense urban fabric...

 

... but that's not the point here; it doesn't exist, and it's pipe-dreaming (delusional) to think that a Shaker Square/Van Aken apartment district development will leap up around this freeway through this dirt poor area (KJP, why go all the way to Boston for pictorial examples when Shaker Square is better?)... And no, KJP, developing the Red Line along the current NS trench was not a "dumb idea".  It was built by CTS following a complete right-of-way development left abandoned by the Van Swerigens for their East Cleveland rapid -- which was to be built in tandem with a Euclid subway and a line spinning off up Cedar Hill to the Heights...

 

The truly dumb idea is this Opportunity Freeway to being with... Only in Cleveland do we do dumb stuff like this -- and have the GM of the rail/bus transit agency sitting on the board to help facilitate it... OIC!!!

^ I disagree that this is a dumb idea. What is dumb and embarrasing is having a heavily traveled freeway "deadend" in the middle of a major american city. This is our chance to fix that.

"heavily traveled" - I must be thinking of a different 490?

I see some older housing in those images, but nothing about it seems fair.  A main premise of the OC is that substantial redevelopment is needed here, for the residents' sake as much as everyone else's.  However, I concede that it won't really do much for the residents.  Promoting it along those lines (the stupid name for example) does a disservice to them and to the project.  The only thing it might do for the area immediately around it is replace decrepit factories with something that's operational, which at least looks better. 

 

I think the OC will primarily help the communities at either end, University Circle and the near west side.  It will also shorten some west side commutes, but I see that as a minor tangential benefit.  Unfortunately if that benefit is used to promote it, the project starts sounding very anti-urban.  But I don't think it is.  I reserve final judgment until I see an actual plan, but in general I think it's worth spending money on, and most of its benefit will be within city limits.     

This is what you call a mature neighborhood....

 

..uhm...yeah. Looks like a fair amount of older residential too me. What am i missing?

 

It's not what you're missing. It's what the neighborhood is missing. It has been eviscerated of virtually all of its housing. This was a very densely developed neighborhood until the 1970s. Now it almost rural -- Cleveland's version of Detroit's "urban prairie."

 

And if we really want to improve Cleveland, get rid of all the damn freeways in the city limits.

"heavily traveled" - I must be thinking of a different 490?

 

Well what would you call it? Seems heavily traveled to me. And that will only increase after the OC.

 

Structure Number: 1811991,  Location: 0.8 MI. EAST OF JCT I-71 (Lat: 41.476953,  Lng: -81.678383),  Route carried "on" structure: Interstate 490,  Year Built: 1990,  Status: Open, Average Daily Traffic: 63,010 (year 2004),  Truck Traffic: 7%,  Average Future Daily Traffic: 87,458 (year 2027),  Design Load: HS 20+Mod,  Features Intersected: CUYAHOGA RIVER

 

freethink I totally agree. 

 

We've got to fix that awkward dead-end, especially considering where it drops you off.  Clearly 490 is an extension of 90 from the west, and it shouldn't end like that.  As it stands, everyone who wants to get on 90 from anywhere near there has to get on 55th and creep down it.  This leads to frequent traffic jams, sometimes from north of Woodland down to 490.  Sometimes it gets hairy going northbound too. 

 

Traffic like this does not just hurt suburban commuters, it hurts inner city industrial commerce in a big way.  Business disruptions (and failures) can occur when trucks get held up in that mess.  Industry flourishes where there's access.  It's not just about tax incentives, it's also about the reliability of day to day operations.   

 

Keep in mind this is an area where people come right up to your car window and knock on it, asking for stuff.  We really don't want an Interstate dead-ending there... and we don't want people getting trapped there, not even in broad daylight.  I don't care where you're from.  On a bad day it's like being in a zombie movie.

An eight-lane interstate highway carrying 63,000 vehicles per day near the urban core of a major American city is not heavily traveled.

 

I do agree however that it will become much busier if the Opportunity Corridor is built. Another step backward for making Cleveland a more urbane city.

^ "Heavily traveled" is all relative as to where you are. In Cleveland it is heavily traveled.

You don't build freeways around rail, you put rail in the middle of existing  freeways, sometimes, where the urban area is dense and cheaper right-of-way alternatives don't exist  (ie Chicago)... And even then, rapid tansit and freeways are contradictory in terms of the type of development they attract.  Chicago's best use of transit in freeways is where there is no freeway interchange at the transit stop, and the freeways is, to the extent it can be, built in a way not to disrupt the dense urban fabric...

 

... but that's not the point here; it doesn't exist, and it's pipe-dreaming (delusional) to think that a Shaker Square/Van Aken apartment district development will leap up around this freeway through this dirt poor area (KJP, why go all the way to Boston for pictorial examples when Shaker Square is better?)... And no, KJP, developing the Red Line along the current NS trench was not a "dumb idea".  It was built by CTS following a complete right-of-way development left abandoned by the Van Swerigens for their East Cleveland rapid -- which was to be built in tandem with a Euclid subway and a line spinning off up Cedar Hill to the Heights...

 

The truly dumb idea is this Opportunity Freeway to being with... Only in Cleveland do we do dumb stuff like this -- and have the GM of the rail/bus transit agency sitting on the board to help facilitate it... OIC!!!

 

I don't know how many times you've been told that the idea isn't to put the Red Line down the middle of a highway, but to build an boulevard with a rail line integrated into the median.  I don't know if you're incapable of comprehending the difference, or if you think that misrepresenting the idea helps you to make your argument, but you are completely misrepresenting it.  I don't care to argue with you about it, but I want to make that clear for any late comers to the discussion.

Cleveland's Opportunity Corridor mustn't be stalled by insular interests

by Thomas Bier

Sunday June 14, 2009, 5:00 AM

Bier is an executive in residence at the Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University.

 

 

Alarm bells rang as I read about the initial meeting of the steering committee formed to shepherd the creation of the Opportunity Corridor, the centerpiece of which involves constructing a new parkway-style road from East 55th Street where Interstate 490 ends to East 105th Street near Cedar Road.

 

It is a major Cleveland economic development initiative. The parkway would provide ready access to large swaths of abandoned land and buildings in the old, old core of the city's East Side. It also would provide a much-needed route to and from the Cleveland Clinic and institutions in University Circle, thus relieving congestion on Chester and Carnegie Avenues.

 

 

More at Cleveland.comhttp://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/06/post_2.html

Why is a publisher so involved in projects which his newspaper must objectively report? First the convention center, now this??

 

As for the topic of Bier's opinion piece: yes, City Hall's bureaucratic bog-down of projects is a serious problem. But let's debate the Opportunity Corridor on its merits. And separately, let's debate how best to reform City Hall. Both issues must be dealt with whether the other issue exists or not.

 

But adding pavement doesn't relieve roadway congestion. Indeed, nothing does. Bier knows the self-defeating fallacy of expanding roadway capacity better than anyone because of his many battles against urban sprawl.

Wow, I totally agree about the involvement conflicts.  It's like this guy has never even heard of the concept.  I disagree that the city hall and development issues aren't intertwined.  They both have to be solved, but I agree with Egger that all these ridiculous demands are endemic to the way the city is run.  They aren't unique to this project by any means.  When a project that's a couple miles long has to deal with three independent "jurisdictions" on top of city hall, it doesn't exactly encourage forward motion. 

Here here!  When it comes down to it we are ALL Clevelanders.  Whether it's the Opportunity Parkway in the east, or the West Shoreway or Clifton BRT in the west, every citizen and every neighborhood will benefit.

 

For all the talk of the Federal stimulus dollars I still see nothing getting done.  How do we expect our leaders to build a new highway when we can't even fix or maintain our existing bridges,  streets and sidewalks?  How is our government so inefficient, despite the fact that they govern less people with more employees?  And it's not just the government.  How do we struggle with vacant land between 55th and 105th, but we took a perfectly good batch of historic buildings in the flats and mowed them down?  After 10 years of the public/private sector wrangling, only to have the project come to a screeching halt?

 

The point here is--there are public funds available--and the time is ripe to use them.  If our leaders sit on their hands for this one--we will never see any of these projects happen.

 

Opportunity Corridor in Cleveland needed to spur development more now than 4 years ago, when Ohio Department of Transportation plans stalled

Posted by Karen Farkas / The Plain Dealer September 10, 2009 20:41PM

 

The need for a parkway from East 55th Street to University Circle to spawn economic and community development has grown even greater since the proposal has lain fallow for four years because of a lack of funds.

 

With so much vacant property near the proposed Opportunity Corridor, the development possibilities are limitless, said Terri Hamilton Brown, project director of the group that will coordinate and promote the project...

 

 

 

ODOT meeting

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation is holding two meetings on Tuesday, Sept. 22, to get public input on routes for the proposed East Side boulevard known as Opportunity Corridor.

 

 

MORE AT CLEVELAND.COM http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/09/opportunity_corridor_in_clevel_1.html

As I have stated in the past, I am all for this road beihng that I don't believe it contributes to sprawl type development.  To me, it simply provides a connection to UC while also opening the door to developing areas of Cleveland that truely have been forgotten. 

why is this proposal so controversial? this part of the red line is terrible and those stations nearly invisible; dark brown tubes milling their way to unmanned wooden stations under a bridge... hmm. i don't think the opportunity corridor could make anything as desolate and terrifying even if it explicitly sought to do it. seems like this project could just as likely make these rapid stations actual destinations within the city as it could turn these empty neighborhoods into strip malls.

 

just have rem koolhaas design it.

 

 

 

 

 

why is this proposal so controversial? this part of the red line is terrible and those stations nearly invisible; dark brown tubes milling their way to unmanned wooden stations under a bridge... hmm. i don't think the opportunity corridor could make anything as desolate and terrifying even if it explicitly sought to do it. seems like this project could just as likely make these rapid stations actual destinations within the city as it could turn these empty neighborhoods into strip malls.

 

just have rem koolhaas design it.

 

HOW?? Do tell!

like i said, have rem koolhaas design it.