No, YOU want to live near people with similar values. Don't comment on things with which you have little or no awareness.

 

EDIT: and what do you mean "YOU would have fewer stops"? How does any of this urban discussion even remotely apply to you??

 

I started the point with "working with a clean slate".  The whole thing was completely hypothetical.  Heavy rail like the Red Line takes time to accelerate and decelerate.  I rode it regularly for about three years and noticed this even then.  It's a resource that can be potentially used to alleviate the "acute angle trip" issue with our current system.  Every stop could and should be a mini-hub of sorts.

 

I would say that the evidence very strongly supports the "similar values" point.  Even the ethnic neighborhoods of a hundred years ago were examples of such.  I would speculate, and that's what it is despite a certain degree of both logical and empirical evidence, that this preference is stronger in dense areas.  What Robert Frost said about fences I believe applies to yards as well. (Yes, I know he was skeptical of the old proverb.  I always believed Twain said it, he would have meant it.)

 

I'm sure they would, but where is the best location? Is next to a transit station the best place for it, or one of a hundred other possible places a little farther away? That is the essence of land use planning for which state laws grants municipal governments the authority to determine. The extreme example is for the health and safety of your constituents (ie: not approving a chemical factory next to a playground and school).

 

Building a school, playground and even houses next to a chemical factory being a different matter entirely of course (see Love Canal).

 

If working with a clean slate except for the tracks, I wouldnt use the Red Line as a neighborhood developer.  Its really not suited for that, as an actual streetcar would be, and the area lacks neighborhoods with the potential to grow.  It doesnt lake desolation, and it doesnt lack crime.  People seeking urban living for the most part are not homesteaders.  Theyll move to the existing urbanist neighborhoods, perhaps on the fringes of same. 

 

Id have fewer stops.  Tower City, perhaps E. 55th, E.89th/Clinic (here or possibly 55th being a connection to Shaker Rapid), UC/Cedar or 105th, Mayfield/120th, and Windermere.  Probably head out to Euclid as well and maybe the Lake County Line.  Similar pattern on the west side out to the Airport, and perhaps points west.  Each of these stations would have bus feeder routes that dont necessarily go downtown. 

 

Yes, youd have two and even three seat trips, but far fewer acute angles to get from point A to point B.

 

"Mixed income", by the way, is a losing battle.  The issue isn't income, but values:  people want to live near those with similar values.

 

I would agree with this.  The reality of the world we live in has more than shown this time and time again.  Theres really no point in continually denying that... 

KJP, re: 79th station question

 

Just because it is not currently ADA compliant does that immediately doom it?

Is it the only non ADA station in the system?

 

(For the record, I fully support the AllAboardOhio idea for a new station)

KJP, re: 79th station question

 

Just because it is not currently ADA compliant does that immediately doom it?

Is it the only non ADA station in the system?

 

(For the record, I fully support the AllAboardOhio idea for a new station)

 

No, GCRTA could seek a temporary exemption from the FTA's Office of Civil Rights, but it would have to demonstrate that it is making progress to find a permanent solution to make the station ADA compliant. But I doubt FTA would award GCRTA any federal funds for such a lightly used station unless it was part of an active neighborhood redevelopment/planning effort that would ultimately boost ridership there. To my knowledge, no such effort has been attempted.

 

At least the Blue/Green line station on East 79th can be made ADA compliant for far less money. GCRTA hasn't considered closing that station.

OK, thanks

BTW, we're having an interesting conversation on Facebook about all of this....

 

^ :D

Both of you are friends on my old profile but not my new one.  Should I chime in and let the other discusser realize you're really his allies?   :evil:

Good article about the current state of the OC, and just how political it is now.  It's a bit rough on the Angie Schmidt crowd.  (for the record, I don't consider transportation experts like KJP to be part of that crowd)

 

One passage I particularly liked:

      "An opportunity isn't a guarantee. It's a challenge. Getting the Opportunity Corridor to live up to its name could be the most difficult and most worthwhile challenge Cleveland takes on in the years ahead."

 

 

 

http://www.clevelandmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=E73ABD6180B44874871A91F6BA5C249C&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=1578600D80804596A222593669321019&tier=4&id=B5C766C8732242D2B566FEB8A320AD5C

^ Erik is a pretty sharp guy. He usually puts quite a bit of research into his writing.

Very good article.  He correctly pointed out that the opposition is primarily transit advocates, so he went to the guy who does it for a living.  He missed a couple of points I would have included, but all in all it was reasonably balanced, if certainly coming from the "pro" side.

 

Has Schmitt even noticed the low transit ridership rate among the "new urban" communuties, which I believe was discussed around here recently?

For the birthplace of equity planning, Cleveland has a choice to make

Marc Lefkowitz  |  02/03/14 @ 11:00am

 

When Fortune called Cleveland the “next Brooklyn” we could hear the snorts, but not from Ohio City, Tremont and Detroit-Shoreway residents who are fluxing in with new wealth and ideas. Their biggest battle ahead may be the ossified thinking about what Cleveland is and can become.

 

...Equity planning counts most when the stakes are high. No doubt, Mayor Jackson, a self-made product of Cleveland, makes many decisions that put people first, most notably, his plan to remake the city’s education system. But where we’ve criticized the current Administration (and likewise its predecessors) is in ceding power to the most powerful when it comes to deciding how the biggest capital inflows shape the lives of its most disadvantaged. Most recently, we held up the Opportunity Corridor as Exhibit A in how the city did not offer a comprehensive vision for investing $331 million in rebuilding a green, vibrant and healthy neighborhood.

 

City Hall has listened more to ODOT and the Greater Cleveland Partnership as they’ve decided how to design the east side around an urban expressway and an industrial landscape. We’re not suggesting that jobs aren’t needed here, but the equity planners of Cleveland’s past would have ensured that an investment this large was foremost about creating an environment for better living—not just warehousing and moving cars.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/2014/02/for-the-birthplace-of-equity-planning-cleveland-has-a-choice-to-make?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I don’t understand the point of this article.  Why couldn’t the point be that we DON’T need this new urban expressway, instead of all the transit and Green people (sans, thankfully, the now-hated Angie Schmidt) bending over backwards trying to accommodate it.  How did we allow John Kasich’s ODOT to snow-job us into believing the OC is some kind of savior to the East Side, when we all REALLY know it’s just a commuter highway to West Siders that will merely serve to dump more cars in the already car-congested University Circle while simultaneously damage UC walkability, spark more parking garage building and hurt the quality transit we have there: namely the Red Line.  Can some urban leader, besides Angie, with a transit and/or Green orientation please stand up and show some public backbone?  … Please?

Every time the anti-OC faction calls it an “expressway”, they lose credibility.  It is not.  They continue to argue with that straw man, because it best fits their “it’s just for the west siders and suburbanites” (they leave out all the other points south and west, including Cleveland Hopkins Airport) narrative. 

 

It’s not.  It’s a compromise between that (for which there is real demand and desire) and a road which can make a difference in the area between the end of 490 and UC.  It’s a compromise that unlike the semi-utopian and highly communitarian alternatives the opponents propose, has the support to get funded.

 

Take a look at the area to the immediate east of Woodland Cemetary, beyond the recently closed T&B Foundry (featuring the wide open dock door on Google maps)  between E.  71st and E. 79th.  It goes beyond blighted and looks post-apocalyptic.  It’s bisected by the Norfolk Southern line, so it certainly has freight access.  I’m not sure what plans (if any) currently exist for this site, but there doesn’t seem to be a hell of a lot of progress on same.

 

I’m not sure what can be done either, at this point, but the current system isn’t exactly working.  The OC might not be the perfect solution, but to deny it can make a difference isn’t reasonable.  It may not make things “green, healthy, and vibrant”, but right now the reality is pretty close to the opposite.

 

^ Take a look at the area to the immediate east of Woodland Cemetary, beyond the recently closed T&B Foundry (featuring the wide open dock door on Google maps)  between E.  71st and E. 79th.  It goes beyond blighted and looks post-apocalyptic.  It’s bisected by the Norfolk Southern line, so it certainly has freight access.  I’m not sure what plans (if any) currently exist for this site, but there doesn’t seem to be a hell of a lot of progress on same.

 

We've gone round and round with this... Yes, it's horrible as is.  But the issue is: why is THIS road the savior?  Why wasn't the area developed without it?  Why is the Miceli Dairy Co. and  Orlando Bakery expanding in this area without it? (ergo, the idea: others COULD develop similar industry in the “Forgotten Triangle” with tax-breaks, (current) road infrastructure improvement and other govt-sponsored nurturing (and much cheaper than the OC) ... IF it was a local politico-financial priority,… which, of course, it isn’t … being home to a lot of poor blacks without cars)…  Why are we being sold Univ. Circle needs this road, when University Circle is THRIVING without it? 

 

Bottom line, E Roc, is that we’ve been sold a bill of goods.  You know it; I don’t have to tell you.  The only way the City and all these otherwise urban-oriented groups to buy into this road (I still call it a highway) is to show blight like you and other OC advocates buy into to make false promises of redevelopment while the only thing that will exist once this road is built … is the road/highway … and maybe a sound barrier next to it.  No industry.  No new neighborhoods; no new retail; no (alleged TOD) –

 

… and boy that last one is such a counterintuitive ruse it isn’t funny… The idea:  we’ve got rail transit in the area, but it has no TOD, so we need the highway/road to develop TOD for the Rapid, which hasn’t developed TOD heretofore because it had no roads/highways since, by definition, can’t develop TRANSIT oriented development which, in this case, will be dependent on the road/highway … Got it?  Talk about pretzelogic. 

 

cI don’t understand the point of this article.  Why couldn’t the point be that we DON’T need this new urban expressway, instead of all the transit and Green people (sans, thankfully, the now-hated Angie Schmidt) bending over backwards trying to accommodate it.  How did we allow John Kasich’s ODOT to snow-job us into believing the OC is some kind of savior to the East Side, when we all REALLY know it’s just a commuter highway to West Siders that will merely serve to dump more cars in the already car-congested University Circle while simultaneously damage UC walkability, spark more parking garage building and hurt the quality transit we have there: namely the Red Line.  Can some urban leader, besides Angie, with a transit and/or Green orientation please stand up and show some public backbone?  … Please?

 

I heard Terri Schwarz, director of KSU's CUDC, speak on the OC in January to a group of young professionals. She believes that the OC is already a done deal (because its supporters are so politically powerful and more importantly, it is already so far in the planning process; RFPs will be going out in March, IIRC) so it's more politically advantageous for those against the OC to try to incorporate green elements in it instead of opposing it in its entirety.

 

 

 

OC advocates buy into to make false promises of redevelopment while the only thing that will exist once this road is built … is the road/highway … and maybe a sound barrier next to it.  No industry.  No new neighborhoods; no new retail; no (alleged TOD) –

 

 

Not sure what you're basing this on other than general negativity toward the project, but I couldn't disagree more.  What other roadway exists like this, that creates a near direct shot between 480/77 access and the University Circle area?  Any developable land will be quickly snapped up.  It's a great location for any business that interacts with the UC area and requires highway access.  Currently, there's nothing else like it anywhere

I do see light-density manufacturing and warehousing activities occurring. In fact, some recent property acquisitions are why All Aboard Ohio is advocating the relocation of the East 79th Red Line station (the East 79th Blue/Green Line station stays put and should be made ADA compliant!) to between Buckeye-Woodland. The acquisition of former Van Dorn Iron Works properties on the west side of East 79th for an expansion of the Orlando Bakery (but only 15 new jobs), and ex-Van Dorn properties by Opal Industrial Group for either a truck terminal, metal recycling facility or both. These property acquisitions have occurred since 2010, likely in anticipation of the Opportunity Corridor. However both acquisitions and their future plans will make ridership growth at this station much more difficult, if not impossible.

Not sure what you're basing this on other than general negativity toward the project, but I couldn't disagree more.  What other roadway exists like this, that creates a near direct shot between 480/77 access and the University Circle area?  Any developable land will be quickly snapped up.  It's a great location for any business that interacts with the UC area and requires highway access.  Currently, there's nothing else like it anywhere

Is all the land along Carnegie and Chester "snapped up"? Both currently have highway access and are direct shots to UC. Clearing and cleaning larger lots will help, as will some tax breaks to the companies that move there, but those would help with or without the road.

I'll go on a limb & say that anything that hasn't been snapped up has major legacy costs requiring serious lead/asbestos/soil contamination issues, not to mention demolition, site prep costs, etc.  You can't compare these types of sites to something that is ready to build on....

lets stop saying 'snapped up'

This probably doesn't belong here so I apologize in advance! I just don't know where to ask. I'm very curious... What is the huge ruin of what looks like a house off from the rapid tracks between 79th and Woodhill? Pulled these from Google maps

This property, 2801 Grand Avenue, is now owned by the County Land Reutilization Corp and contaminated by hazardous wastes left unremediated by prior owners including DLH Plating and possibly others (SOURCE http://epa.ohio.gov/portals/32/pdf/DLH%20Plating%20Closure%20Plan%20Approval%2006.06.12.pdf). The property will be taken for the Opportunity Corridor boulevard.

If it is structurally sound, they should move it. 

I wonder what it's history.  Was it originally a house, or an office type building constructed for a nearby factory?

 

With the funding from the turnpike in place, the road is going to happen.  we need to push for historic preservation, soil remediation, complementary transportation methods, basically everything and the kitchen sink.

 

why not?  make the road as good as it can be.

 

^ its from the late 1800's, but thats all i know. I wish there was a better picture of it.

This probably doesn't belong here so I apologize in advance! I just don't know where to ask. I'm very curious... What is the huge ruin of what looks like a house off from the rapid tracks between 79th and Woodhill? Pulled these from Google maps

 

That structure looks like a 19th-century factory office building, not a house. And it appears to be located within, or just north of the proposed right of way of the Opportunity Corridor. Either way, I suspect it will be demolished.

 

Considering the size/style of the other houses in the neighborhood, it probably was not built as a house. It may have been built at the same time or even shortly before the surrounding neighborhood was built, possibly by the factory owners (which was common for factories to build the housing, or even entire neighborhoods, for their workers). This area along the north-south tracks was first developed with industrial uses during the Civil War (shortly after the C&P rail line was built in 1852) and developed more quickly in the 1870s which is when the Van Dorn Iron Works on the west side of the tracks was built. By the 1880s, when the east-west rail line was built, this was already a flourishing industrial area.

 

This probably doesn't belong here so I apologize in advance! I just don't know where to ask. I'm very curious... What is the huge ruin of what looks like a house off from the rapid tracks between 79th and Woodhill? Pulled these from Google maps

 

That structure looks like a 19th-century factory office building, not a house. And it appears to be located within, or just north of the proposed right of way of the Opportunity Corridor. Either way, I suspect it will be demolished.

 

Considering the size/style of the other houses in the neighborhood, it probably was not built as a house. It may have been built at the same time or even shortly before the surrounding neighborhood was built, possibly by the factory owners (which was common for factories to build the housing, or even entire neighborhoods, for their workers). This area along the north-south tracks was first developed with industrial uses during the Civil War (shortly after the C&P rail line was built in 1852) and developed more quickly in the 1870s which is when the Van Dorn Iron Works on the west side of the tracks was built. By the 1880s, when the east-west rail line was built, this was already a flourishing industrial area.

 

Thanks for moving my post and the info. Too bad what became of the area. It always struck me as such an interesting structure that stands out since it is surrounded by rubble.

^ its from the late 1800's, but thats all i know. I wish there was a better picture of it.

 

googlemaps has a better picture of it on streetview.

 

http://goo.gl/maps/rqR0c

^ its from the late 1800's, but thats all i know. I wish there was a better picture of it.

 

googlemaps has a better picture of it on streetview.

 

http://goo.gl/maps/rqR0c

 

Yeah, that's a plant administration building. Some from that era are quite solid and ornate. Like this one (the middle photo) for the Brown Hoisting Company on St. Clair posted at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,766.msg694105.html#msg694105

While I have no idea what this particular complex was, it caused me to look up the location of a couple old plants I do know.  Neither of which is tagged on Google Maps.  National Acme at 131st and Coit is a historically significant location to the machining industry as Acme mutlispindle machines remain one of the true staples of same.  The vacant lot at Cedar and Clarkwood south of 65th was TRW's Clarkwood Valve plant.

 

If CSU or Case has an industrial (or Cleveland) history related class, tagging these old site on Google (or an independent online map) would make a nice class project.  There's so many of them, particularly in the OC area.. 

This is a great presentation from Kent State Cleveland Urban Design Collective on the potiential of the Opportunity Corridor, and how its current management falls short. 

 

http://www.cudc.kent.edu/projects_research/research/opportunity_corridor.html

^That was a good report.  More critical Qs need to be asked... unfortunately, many of these questions weren't asked earlier and, as the report below notes, this was probably because the planning has been very hush-hush/out of the public view.

A call for the Opportunity Corridor to be reevaluated with more transparency and honesty

 

Posted on Tuesday, March 18, 2014 by Chris Stocking

 

I currently live on the east side of Cleveland, and having worked with patients on the east side for years, I have always wondered what it would take to help our struggling communities.  I did home care throughout these neighborhoods for a number of years, and the effect of being surrounded by blight constantly grated on me: Why so much vacant space?  What would help these neighborhoods?  Why is no one investing in these communities?

 

Last summer, as I continued to contemplate these questions in between dodging potholes on East 93rd and East 116th Streets, I heard on the radio that an unexpected source of funding had been found for the “Opportunity Corridor” from Ohio Turnpike funds.  John Kasich, Ohio’s governor, was touting the benefits for the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals and how it would also “lend hope and economic development to battered neighborhoods.”  Meanwhile, business leaders from the Greater Cleveland Partnership that lobbied for the corridor wanted specifics on when funding would be given so that construction could start as soon as possible.  I wondered what exactly the corridor was all about, how it would effect residents of the east side, and why business leaders were hastily pushing for construction?  Were the problems of Cleveland’s east side really as simple as building a new road?  Also, why were business leaders lobbying for the project and more than residents or community development leaders?  I never thought the answers would be complicated, but here I am, more than 6 months later, still reading about the issues behind the project.  So, being a nearby resident of the Larchmere neighborhood and interacting with residents of these neighborhoods daily while doing home visits, I started to research the project.

 

http://eatrighteous.org/opportunitycorridor/

 

^Yes it is PoshSteve -- glad you took time to read it.  It's the most comprehensive report on the OC I've seen -- he even quotes KJP's thoughtful All Aboard Ohio call to relocate the Red Line's E. 79 station to Buckeye & Woodland.

 

This report's over a month old but, obviously, hasn't gotten a lot of pub -- I just happened to stumble across it searching for something else... I know the OC has been a major hot-button UO issue, and I'm sure because the author, Chris Stocking, raises a number of (legit imho) questions about the OC's planning process, some will feel he has an agenda ...  but I don't get that.  He states up front that as a medical person (of some kind) and a Larchmere resident, he knew little about the OC and took it upon himself to self-educate.

 

I hope others read it as well because he raises some well thought out points without being divisive and attacking.

wow, very informative. kudos to him for putting that all together. some of those neighborhood statistics really startled me!

Well thought out article, and somewhat disconcerting that the option promoting the use of existing infrastructure (an option myself and others have promoted on this thread) was thrown out immediately, without any real consideration. Also rather distressing that the minutes from all of the meetings have not been made publicly available. This just reinforces my concern that this road is being promoted by certain interests over the benefit of the public at large.

 

I'm STILL on the fence about it, primarily because of the benefit of instant brownfield remediation along the corridor, offset by the cost. I really want to hold the city, ODOT, UCI, etc's feet to the fire about the real economic development benefits of this. How are the parties going to use this project as meaningful development? Soft numbers don't promote your case anymore. Nor does "if you build it, they will come". I want to see that there are potential businesses on the record as interested in relocating here if the corridor is built as proposed.

^And to add to that, I want to see a meaningful rezoning that sets in stone some of the development principles that make this project potentially desirable, so we don't just get a bunch of low employment-density single story warehouses with big lawns and a fast food restaurant or two.

A couple things went unmentioned that usually do when one has taken sides strongly enough to call CTE a “concerned grassroots group”.  One is that simply expanding  an existing street would make the traffic problems worse (during construction) while not providing any additional flexibility to allow for future construction (a big benefit of building a new road).

 

The other, of course, is that the neighborhoods in question are predominantly rentals.  The residents, for the most part, don’t have strong neighborhood roots and the landlords would love to get rid of the property.  As for history:  quite frankly I was born in the Hyacinth neighborhood and had family ties to it until 1997, and I would sooner see a big chunk of it replaced by something that could help the rest than have it be like it is today.

 

It's disturbing that RTA has been very passive regarding this project, since this is an urban roadway through an area with such a high percentage of transit-dependent residents --  the lone exception being Joe Calabrese's speaking out for a revamping of the E.105-Quincy OC connection that would have effectively cut off the Rapid Station... But ODOT has only really been pushed about serious OC transit inclusion by EPA and All Aboard Ohio, notably KJP's article regarding the Red Line/E. 79 station relocation to Buckeye-Woodland, that makes sense.

 

-RTA hasn't been active in TOD discussion around OC stations

 

- I haven't heard about, until this report, the fact that the OC will effectively cut off the still new E. 55 station will essentially from the Slavic Village houses (those that survive OC demolition) save the slim pedestrian bridge.  Where's RTA on this?

 

- RTA/Calabrese HAS spoken enthusiastically about running West Side buses along the OC in obvious competition with the existing Red Line...

 

... and I'm just scratching the surface.  Chris Stocking lays it out very well.  I just wish his report would get (would have gotten, it’s nearly 2 months old) more publicity because it is comprehensive, thorough and even historical... But with Terry Eggar co-helming the OC, obviously we’ll never see it in the PD… ditto Crain’s, since the corporate bigwigs are pushing this project hard… Damn shame.

 

It's disturbing that RTA has been very passive regarding this project, since this is an urban roadway through an area with such a high percentage of transit-dependent residents --  the lone exception being Joe Calabrese's speaking out for a revamping of the E.105-Quincy OC connection that would have effectively cut off the Rapid Station... But ODOT has only really been pushed about serious OC transit inclusion by EPA and All Aboard Ohio, notably KJP's article regarding the Red Line/E. 79 station relocation to Buckeye-Woodland, that makes sense.

 

-RTA hasn't been active in TOD discussion around OC stations

 

- I haven't heard about, until this report, the fact that the OC will effectively cut off the still new E. 55 station will essentially from the Slavic Village houses (those that survive OC demolition) save the slim pedestrian bridge.  Where's RTA on this?

 

- RTA/Calabrese HAS spoken enthusiastically about running West Side buses along the OC in obvious competition with the existing Red Line...

 

Look at the satellite view.  The station's already cut off, if anything a finished OC will increase access. 

 

As for the buses, I'd think it would make more sense to run a frequent bus up and down the corridor between 55th and 105th, getting rid of the 79th station completely, controlling the connection area and setting up a fare-free transfer..  It might make sense to continue it into UC.

Look at the satellite view.  The station's already cut off, if anything a finished OC will increase access. 

 

Really?? How's that?

Look at the satellite view.  The station's already cut off, if anything a finished OC will increase access. 

 

Really?? How's that?

 

 

 

The railyards to the north are obvious.  55th in this vicinity resembles what the OC is meant to be, though access from there is decent  There's a junkyard across Bower to the south, a few houses to the west, and Bower ends at 61st, splitting into Bulter and Carpenter which end at 64th.  This is very low density at best and many of the remaining houses are in poor shape.

 

Assuming the northern edge of the OC corresponds to the northern edge of Bower, there's no reason why the station would not have similar access from that direction.  Hence the "if anything, access is increased.".

 

People keep thinking like this is an actual freeway.  It isn't, and indeed the block by block design is still quite flexible.

 

Here's the revised plan for the area that includes the pedestrian bridge.

It's about as close to a freeway at this location as any. The only reason why ODOT didn't want at-grade intersection here is because ODOT contends the traffic coming off I-490 would be too fast and too voluminous to have it just stop at a traffic signal at East 55th.

 

If we're going to improve the station's pedestrian linkages to and promote economic development within the Slavic Village neighborhood, then let's put a plaza or community center fronting on East 55th and above the Opportunity Corridor.

It's about as close to a freeway at this location as any. The only reason why ODOT didn't want at-grade intersection here is because ODOT contends the traffic coming off I-490 would be too fast and too voluminous to have it just stop at a traffic signal at East 55th.

Which makes me wonder what they're smoking since 490 currently stops at a traffic light on 55th.

 

If we're going to improve the station's pedestrian linkages to and promote economic development within the Slavic Village neighborhood, then let's put a plaza or community center fronting on East 55th and above the Opportunity Corridor.

I like your thinking.

It's about as close to a freeway at this location as any. The only reason why ODOT didn't want at-grade intersection here is because ODOT contends the traffic coming off I-490 would be too fast and too voluminous to have it just stop at a traffic signal at East 55th.

Which makes me wonder what they're smoking since 490 currently stops at a traffic light on 55th.

 

If we're going to improve the station's pedestrian linkages to and promote economic development within the Slavic Village neighborhood, then let's put a plaza or community center fronting on East 55th and above the Opportunity Corridor.

I like your thinking.

 

I hadn’t seen that level of detail, but exactly:  it already stops with a traffic light at E. 55th street.  If they’re that concerned, put down speed strips.  In fact, they probably should anyway if the OC continues straight in place of Bower, as sometimes the light will be green.  Sheesh.  In any case, this is likely nowhere close to the final plan.

 

The fact is, the Hyacinth neighborhood has always been on the peripheries (at best) of “Slavic Village”, which is traditionally the 65th and Fleet area.  In addition, the area north of Francis has always been considered the peripheries of the Hyacinth neighborhood.  It’s hemmed in by the railyards, the Kingsbury run valley, and 55th.  There’s nothing there to excite any preservationists, and indeed what is there is for the most part quite bedraggled.

 

This planning is ridiculous: ODOT is building a grade separated intersection, yet the most disruption will be from an ingress/egress connector btw the 2 roads – complete with traffic lights at both end -- that will wipe out a bunch of houses.  And sorry E.Rocc, regardless of what condition we may perceive these buildings, there are people who call them home.  And I drove around this area recently, and found those houses are not in as bad a shape as even I perceived; and there’s a bit of density there too (behind that awful mini-junk yard)… If planners/advocates want to make this the road (As in: not a highway) the advocates say the OC is, then they should build an at-grade intersection at E. 55 because Keith is right, there already IS a traffic light there with siphoned I-490 (and I-77) traffic.  If they keep it at grade they save the homes and minimally keep the RTA station accessible without spending a ton of cash.

If they’re that concerned, put down speed strips.  In fact, they probably should anyway if the OC continues straight in place of Bower, as sometimes the light will be green.  Sheesh.  In any case, this is likely nowhere close to the final plan.

 

They are that concerned and that is the final plan. Everything ODOT does is about traffic engineering -- accommodating ever more vehicles at the highest/safest possible speeds. Never build a 90-degree turn in a pedestrian-heavy setting when you can build a gently diverging lane to keep the traffic flowing. And never have 30,000 vehicles a day pour off an interstate onto a very short roadway that precedes a traffic signal. In traffic engineering classes, that will get you an "F" on the final exam.

I would think that having a highway come down to a stop light is even worse when that stop light is going to be hidden behind an overpass.  These guys are smoking crack.

This planning is ridiculous: ODOT is building a grade separated intersection, yet the most disruption will be from an ingress/egress connector btw the 2 roads – complete with traffic lights at both end -- that will wipe out a bunch of houses.  And sorry E.Rocc, regardless of what condition we may perceive these buildings, there are people who call them home.  And I drove around this area recently, and found those houses are not in as bad a shape as even I perceived; and there’s a bit of density there too (behind that awful mini-junk yard)… If planners/advocates want to make this the road (As in: not a highway) the advocates say the OC is, then they should build an at-grade intersection at E. 55 because Keith is right, there already IS a traffic light there with siphoned I-490 (and I-77) traffic.  If they keep it at grade they save the homes and minimally keep the RTA station accessible without spending a ton of cash.

 

My family owned a house in that neighborhood until 1997.  Indeed, as estate executor I was the de facto landlord until we sold it.  I will tell you that during the last seven  years or so, our most reliable tenants were crack dealers.  The people before and their girlfriends after were a disaster. 

 

That experience isn’t unique up there by any stretch of the imagination.  You will find the vast majority of property owners delighted to sell.  Perhaps you can boost their payment if they agree to reinvest at least a certain amount in residential property (including that which they already own) within the city of Cleveland.

 

As for the tenants, few if any are likely to have strong ties to that immediate area.  It’s not like there’s a housing shortage in that general area, especially if places are fixed (see payment above).  If they are getting compensated for moving expenses and perhaps new security deposits, they are winning too.

 

I agree about 300% with the at-grade intersection at 55th.  I'd run the road east, replacing and widening Bower as needed.