.... I do like the idea of a rail extension in this corridor because rail already exists.

 

Bingo!! Stop right there...

 

> And thinking REALLY long term, if the Ohio Hub PEIS selects the former Erie-Lackawanna right of way for Cleveland - Pittsburgh high-speed rail, the LRT could be extended to serve a station on the former E-L rail corridor.

Would have to grab the right of way back from the Portage county parks system:

"The Park is open from dawn to dusk, 7 days a week Using the old Erie Lackawanna Railroad corridor, the 7 mile Headwaters Trail runs by beautiful forest and farmland connecting Garrettsville Village Park and Mantua Village Park."

Yep. I drove on the old right of way shortly after the track was pulled out in 1982. And before I could drive, I used to walk that track alot when it still had lots of trains, since I lived less than a mile from it near Geauga Lake. It also had Ohio's last commuter train, but I moved to that area in 1978, a year after the commuter train stopped running. But that's a subject for another thread (or two!).

Dick Jacobs was so powerful to stop a Blue Line extension to serve the large public good (like also serving popular, publicly-owned Tri-C East).  Not to be crass, but Dick is dead; does Jeff and the family feel the same?  It doesn't seem like there's not other land out there that Jacobs doesn't own where TOD could be developed...

 

Meanwhile, a rail extension along Northfield to economically-distressed North Randall, also serving struggling Thistledown along the way -- especially  ending at a rebuilt Randall Mall complex (w/ something different, of course)... It would be a no-brainer to any other rail-based city.  Cleveland, however, tries to pretend it doesn't even have a rapid transit system... damn shame.

Well if they're going to consider going as far as Randall Park Mall, have they considered going all the way down to Southgate and the Park and Ride that already exists there? Maybe not immediately but they should at least leave open the possibility, in my opinion.

How busy are the Warrensville Ctr. buses? (The 41 I believe)  If BRT makes any sense, anywhere, why not head NORTH rather than south?  No point in inanely changing a rail line into a bus line.  The blue line should remain light rail and if extended, head south.  F*** Jacobs and F*** Chagrin Highlands.  But if you want BRT, run it up Warrensville, north from the end of the Blue line at the new intersection, up to Mayfield Road.  I believe Oakwood GC is being sold.  Develop that as a TOD, and you would have good transit linkage that connects new development there, the new Cedar Center, and John Carroll University, to both the Green line and Blue line rapid.  To me that makes more sense than extending an rail line south, except, not on rails but an articulated bus.

I know this public meeting was mentioned at the end of the PD article the other day, but I thought I'd post the press release for those that missed it, plus this includes an email address where the public can comment without attending the meeting.

News & Updates: Newsroom

 

RTA news

 

Feb. 8, 2010

 

RTA hosts Feb. 22 public meeting on Blue Line extentsion

 

CLEVELAND – The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA), in cooperation with Shaker Heights and surrounding communities, will hold a public meeting on Monday, Feb. 22, regarding the Blue Line extension analysis.

 

The meeting will be held from 6-8 p.m. in Room B of the Cuyahoga County Public Library, 22035 Clarkwood Parkway, Warrensville Heights.

 

The Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis focuses on the potential extension of the Blue Line along with other potential transit service expansion to the east, southeast and south of the Warrensville-Van Aken area. The public is invited to attend this meeting. Feasible alternatives for the Blue Line Extension will be presented and discussed.

 

Public comments will be accepted through March 15 at [email protected].

 

This project is coordinated with two other ongoing projects in the study area: the Warrensville-Van Aken Roadway Redevelopment and Shaker Heights Intermodal Transit Center Program Plan for Warrensville-Van Aken.

 

The Plain Dealer wrote about this on Feb. 8, 2010.

From the Plain Dealer:

Poor timing for a necessary study by the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority: editorial

By Other Voices

February 12, 2010, 4:32AM

 

The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's $1.17 million study of expanding the Blue Line rapid in Shaker Heights to the village of North Randall, among other options, couldn't come at a worse time.

 

RTA had a $17.4 million deficit, which it resolved by cutting salary, staff and service. The cuts have infuriated bus drivers and riders, who aren't pleased by talk of expanding the Blue Line.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/02/poor_timing_for_a_necessary_st.html

Someone should tell these people it takes years to move these things along.  And that expanding rail may save money in the long run.

It's all about perception which is often stronger than reality.

That is either a terribly written headline or a terribly written editorial.  Although, given that it's the Plain Dealer, I suppose one shouldn't rule out the possibility that it's both. 

If the redevelopment of North Randall is anything less than a scorched earth redo I'd be hard pressed to convince my fellow southeastsiders to consider leaving their car there for a park-n-ride.

 

I think that area has already been scorched, leaving a complete redo the only option anyway. Besides, I have always felt that this area has a worse reputation than the reality of the problems. Other cities have successfully redeveloped much worse areas.

 

But if you want BRT, run it up Warrensville, north from the end of the Blue line at the new intersection, up to Mayfield Road. I believe Oakwood GC is being sold. Develop that as a TOD, and you would have good transit linkage that connects new development there, the new Cedar Center, and John Carroll University, to both the Green line and Blue line rapid. To me that makes more sense than extending an rail line south, except, not on rails but an articulated bus.

 

That's one of the best ideas I've heard in a while. I can't think of a more prime candidate on the east side for BRT than Warrensville Center in this area. It seems like a great way to have a good north-south connection to and between the more efficient east-west transit routes.

Here's RTA's Initial Screening of Alternative routes and modes for a Blue line extension.  For once, JoeC's transit agency appears to be out front of a projected rail expansion -- amazing.  Granted, Shaker Heights sort forced RTA's w/ it's TOD/intersection reconfig, but...  Expanding the Blue Line to Randall Mall's site, makes perfect sense... and I'm glad RTA's presentation at least still notes a possible extension to Chagrin Highlands... I hope we don't give up on such a worthwhile rail expansion.

 

http://www.shakeronline.com/Media/PDFs/Uploader/1272010135929Track_1_Presentation_1-21-10.pdf

 

 

I'm not so sure that I'm on board with the idea of extending the Blue Line to Northfield to spur redevelopment. I'd rather they run it along Chagrin to connect with more things that are worth going to- more jobs and shopping, and concentrate redevelopment along the already existing stations farther east.  I don't think connecting to yet another economically distressed area really strengthens the argument for the public to view the Blue Line as an important transit connection.  And if it hasn't spurred redevelopment in the existing segments, why do we think that adding yet more empty land in yet another broke city will make the line desirable enough to spur growth?

^Well said. I agree.

I'm not so sure that I'm on board with the idea of extending the Blue Line to Northfield to spur redevelopment. I'd rather they run it along Chagrin to connect with more things that are worth going to- more jobs and shopping, and concentrate redevelopment along the already existing stations farther east. I don't think connecting to yet another economically distressed area really strengthens the argument for the public to view the Blue Line as an important transit connection. And if it hasn't spurred redevelopment in the existing segments, why do we think that adding yet more empty land in yet another broke city will make the line desirable enough to spur growth?

 

It has to get to irrelevant places like Randall Park before it can go through them to highly relevant places like Solon, which has a thriving industrial sector.  Exurbs aren't just bedroom communites, and jobs aren't just downtown.  Agreed that the immediate value of reaching Randall Park, in and of itself, is limited. 

It actually doesn't have to go to Randall Park to get somewhere relevant.  If the line is taken 2.5 miles down Chagrin instead of 2.5 miles down Northfield it will run right through the middle of one of the largest employment concentrations in Greater Cleveland and to a major shopping center, one that actually has tenants.  Connecting to this will increase the value of the Blue Line as a transportation asset.  Connecting to a vacant mall and a race track, not so much.

But the question that needs to be asked, and for which there is no answer yet, is where are people coming from/going to who work, live or visit the various land uses along the Chagrin corridor? I have seen some bus riders waiting at stops along Chagrin between Warrensville and I-271, but I've also seen them along Northfield and Warrensville from Chagrin south to the mall. If security issues can be addressed, I really like the idea of a park-n-ride at/near Randall Park. It's geographically well positioned to catch downtown-bound commuters funneling into I-480.

 

The start-up costs will likely be larger for going east on Chagrin considering there is no readily available median as there is on Northfield. The reason is all the property takes, legal costs and utility relocations that will be necessary to create a right of way (either next to Chagrin or in a newly created median). There may be added riders along Chagrin that don't exist on the route to Randall Park that make this worthwhile. But until the study is done we won't know.

Its mainly 2 options I see for this.  If there is a chance of commuter rail via the Erie-Lackawanna rail line from Aurora/Solon to Cleveland and if this blue line could connect or terminate at a station in North Randall, I would say do that.  I don't think any of that is likely so the better option is having it end in Chagrin Highlands someplace off of Harvard.  The benefit is totally the park and ride option for far east-siders and Summit County residents. 

Maybe we can do Chagrin AND Solon, with this Chagrin-Warrensville-Northfield-Van Aken ishkabibble as the switching point, like Shaker Square.  The Chagrin part would be difficult for the reasons listed above, though shorter.  There isn't really anywhere to go with it past the shopping area.  That should limit the cost at least a little.  And that shopping area makes the Chagrin line desirable for quality of life.  It offers something you can't currently get to on the Rapid system, nor could you with an extension to Solon.  And Chagrin, even past 271, is more TOD-oriented than Solon to begin with. 

 

So I like both about equally.  Whichever one ends up being cheaper, do that one first.  But don't do it with BRT.  And if possible, have them all come direct from downtown.  The Chagrin route is short, and the Solon line would be pretty fast with infrequent stops.  I don't think we need a whole different system to reach Solon.  I wouldn't take it past Solon though.  I'd also like to see the Red Line go as far as South Park, one day.  The centers of the "corner" municipalities in the county seem like reasonable boundaries for the Rapid system, as long as the stop frequency in those outer areas is appropriately thin.     

First off, extension of the Blue Line up Chagrin is a non-starter.  It's an already built up area whereby the 1st mile is, on one side, a huge cemetery and public golf course -- neither would be likely relocated b/c of rail.  Beyond that, you have the heavily built-up sprawling Beachwood office/retail development.  And while a median could be built in Chagrin, it already exists along Northfield.

 

I disagree w/ X that redevelopment shouldn't be strongly considered.  North Randall and the portion of Warrensville Hts near NR is economically devastated, with either empty standing buildings (Randall Mall, the Holiday Inn @ Emery, to name a few) or vacant land that contained large buildings; ie: the huge lot where big-box Zayre's used to be... The concept of rapid transit is to both create density while simultaneously move people to/from the density that's created... Witness the high-density expansion of cities like New York and Chicago in the late 19th/early 20th Centuries follwing development and expansion of their elevated and subway systems... More recently, look at D.C. in in-city nabes like U-Street -- bombed out and desolate after late 60s rioting until the late 80s, now among D.C's hottest/trendiest areas primarily spawned by extension of the Green Line Metro thru the neighborhood.  The old burned-out shell/now rehabbed rowhomes have been supplemented by a number of upscale mid-to-high rises in the U St. area.

 

North Randall/Warr Hts. is an opportunity for an extreme urban makeover creating high-density TOD development.  The land and opportunity is there, esp with the recent closure of Randall Mall, which sits on a gigantic parcell which also adjoins a I-480 freeway ramp (which was the original basis for locating the Mall there). 

 

Credit Shaker Heights for having the vision and foresight to get the ball rolling by moving forward to recreate the Chagrin/Northfield/Warr/V.Aken intersection into TOD w/ the Blue Line as its centerpiece.  Keep in mind, the area around this intersection, while sprawling and dysfunctional from a modern transit/density construct, is currently far more economically viable than anything in North Randall and, yet, Shaker still has opted to move forward w/ the TOD makeover.

Clvlndr, while Im not disagreeing with you in concept, keep in mind that the examples which you give of places like Washington DC, are instances that happened due to conditions and factors that do not exist in Northeast Ohio. 

 

That doesnt mean that we shouldnt be thinking in those terms, and of ways to improve upon past planning mistakes, but I think we have enough established areas that need help before rethinking an entire area from scratch like would have to be done at Randall. 

 

I think  Straphanger had some of the best and most realistic ideas for the Randall site, which involved saplings and an industrial park. 

First off, extension of the Blue Line up Chagrin is a non-starter. It's an already built up area whereby the 1st mile is, on one side, a huge cemetery and public golf course -- neither would be likely relocated b/c of rail.

 

 

Not be argumentative, because I actually prefer the Northfield route to realize some big, long-term visions of mine, but the one side of Northfield route also has the huge golf course plus some long setbacks going past Harvard, associated with the Chagrin Highlands.

 

But if the recommendation is to send the line south on Northfield, I think I'd like to see tiny, corrupt North Randall get merged with another community (or three) to give it more wherewithal to allow for its own redevelopment. Otherwise I fear it is too small and corrupt to save itself (see Linndale).

clvndr, I never said that redevelopment shouldn't be a strong consideration.  I don't think any reasonable reading of my posts would lead one to that conclusion.  I said that it makes more sense to strengthen the Blue Line as an asset to the areas that it goes to by taking it to a stronger destination than it does to run it to yet another distressed area.  What's the value of connecting empty fields to empty malls? The Blue Line hasn't spurred urban style development in the urban neighborhoods it already passes through(at least not since Shaker Square was built), why would we expect it to spur it in an additional suburban neighborhood?  How does connecting to Randall Park make the Blue Line into a greater asset to the people and neighborhoods that already have Blue Line access?  Is that as great a benefit as we would get from connecting to the jobs and shopping that exist further down Chagrin?

 

KJP is right though, we need to study all the options for cost and benefit.  We should consider benefits to the neighborhood being expanded into, but also to the neighborhoods the Blue Line already runs through.

The Blue Line hasn't spurred urban style development in the urban neighborhoods it already passes through(at least not since Shaker Square was built),

 

 

Most of the apartment buildings along Van Aken were built in the 50s and 60s. I don't know if someone would consider them urban, but someone from the 1960s (or someone from Geauga County) might considering what else was being built in America back then.

OK, very little in the last half century!

The Blue Line hasn't spurred urban style development in the urban neighborhoods it already passes through(at least not since Shaker Square was built), why would we expect it to spur it in an additional suburban neighborhood? 

 

KJP got there 1st; what are all the apts along Van Aken?  The Van Sweringens planned for a mainly single-home community with set asides for high-density growth.  I don't get your point.  There hasn't been much other growth along the Blue Line in a half century mainly because the Blue Line hasn't been extended ... I believe, since the Depression.  Shaker Heights and the Cleveland areas around the Blue Line, beyond Woodhill, at least, are pretty much built out... how do you expect growth to occur when the rail lines themselves are not being expanded?

 

Other cities expand their transit lines to spur growth as well as connect built-up areas and focus higher density growth there.  Look at the continued growth of the oldest subway in the nation: Boston; it's still growing.  Yeah, the Red Line wasn't the greatest route for a number of reasons, principally being along a windy freight line that, often, is away from population centers.  Along the way, of course, we let historical knot-head Al Porter kill a downtown subway that would have spurred growth; so, now, we're so cynical about rail, we're skeptical about even expanding it beyond a few hundred feet, ... like the Blue Line...

 

It's a sign of our mentality in Cleveland and Ohio that the 2 mile, $60M Waterfront Line, extended to what should be our hottest growth area -- yeah, the waterfront thing that sizzles in most cities -- is still controversial... I'm glad the Flats East Bank project, exactly the type of tight, TOD that should bring a lot more passengers and spur more growth, is finally coming out of the ground ... a mere 14+ years after the WFL openend...

 

That the piddling $400M Stimulus grant for 3-C Amtrak is similarly generating such angst locally (Ohio-wise, that is) should tell you something about our collective mindset here  ... oh yeah, that's another thread... 

what are all the apts along Van Aken? 

 

About 50 years old.  Have we seen anything recently?  Why don't we focus on trying to spur development around the many stops in Cleveland that are largely surrounded by vacant land instead of trying to open up a huge can of redevelopment worms in Northfield?  Maybe if the Blue Line connected to a few more things people wanted to be near, instead of an abandoned mall then the land around existing Blue Line stops would be in higher demand and we would see some more development.

^clvndr might be referring to the new development at Van Aken and Lee Road... Avalon Station is the name of it and it coincides with some sprucing up of Shaker Towne Center (lee and chagrin).  http://www.avalonlofts.com/

^clvndr might be referring to the new development at Van Aken and Lee Road... Avalon Station is the name of it and it coincides with some sprucing up of Shaker Towne Center (lee and chagrin).  http://www.avalonlofts.com/

 

Thats the one that recently went into foreclosure proceedings and only (something like) 21 out of 50 some units have sold thus far.  This was an attempt to spruce up and make the area more TOD like, but it was clearly just bad timing.

 

 

Actually, Ferrari, Shaker's been working to try and develop TOD development for nearly 2 decades; some successful, others, like the 20-year-old strip mall Shaker Towne Center at Chagrin-Lee-Avalon, an absolute flop.  It's hard; Shaker's an old burb that's been built up along the Rapid.  The only open space for TOD along the Rapid in Shaker, is the open field in the Shaker Blvd median the 1 mile btw Warrensville and Green, and nobody wants to touch that restful, bucolic area in the midst of a busy suburban region... The 3 major pockets of high-rises along Van Aken -- Shaker Sq., the Lee Rd area, and Lynnfield-Farnsleigh, were all set asides by the Vans in the 20s, and developed with mid-rise apt blocks slowly over the decades into the early 60s.

 

I believe the optimal development is Northfield-Harvard-Highlands.  The area's still only lightly built up; the right of way is there, and a growing Tri-C campus is there... But people seem to think that, since the big bad Jacobs' thumbed their noses at the Blue Line, the idea is dead forever.  At least the RTA Alternative Summary done last month keeps the Highlands route as a Blue Line possibility. 

 

But I still stand by the Randall Mall expansion.  Why not try and create growth and optimism in a devastated economic area?  Our whole region is hurting, generally, but it's flat out stupid to throw away/ignore an area just because it's not popular, esp when when the Blue Line is right there and is being extended to a media right-of-way at the top of the corridor. 

 

I hate to say it, because I'm a transit guy, but I think the idea that extending the blue line down Northfield will lead to redevelopment of Randall Park mall and all the underused land along the way is pure fantasy. 

 

Clvlndr, there is nothing "controversial" about developing TOD along the waterfront line- that's a total straw man.  The only thing "controversial" is expecting TOD to happen in Cleveland just because we build rail.  As others point out, comparisons to Boston and DC are just completely inapt because of NEO's vastly different housing market and traffic conditions.

TOD works just fine here, when it's done right for the market.  Most of what's along Van Aken does very well and always has.  The super expensive Avalon condos didn't do well because they're super expensive condos.  The TOD-friendly market segment here needs rentals, not high-end condos.  That's years down the line.

 

The lower part of the Shaker lines, the numbered streets, has too many barriers to development.  Can't say TOD doesn't work in Cleveland based on one of its worst neighborhoods.  It isn't the train's fault that's the hood.  Incremental growth is unlikely due to the condition of the surrounding area.  Larger projects might work one day but they're out of the question now, if we can barely even do them downtown. 

 

They already tried at St. Lukes/116 and went the wrong way, with single family homes.  93rd?  That would be awesome, with the views, but it's awfully rough around there.  Same goes for 79th, which has far-off potential but is a total mess.  There are concentrations of public housing and general abandonment right by the stops at 93 and 79.  Better by 116 but not light years better.  55th is by the main railyard in the city's scrap metal district.  The area around 34th has CCC but nothing else to recommend it.  Plasma cutting and large tanks of stuff. 

 

We'd have better luck building around the Red Line in East Cleveland than along the lower Shaker lines.  University Circle development, in general, is TOD.  So is the FEB.  We may yet get somewhere with parts of the west side Red Line.  Any others?  We need to extend rail service to new areas, urban and beyond, to make more opportunities.  West shore commuter rail would boost Edgewater and Detroit-Shoreway.  The eastern shore is also dying for rail service, something to help turn the page from slow decline.  This would help put Collinwood on a more even footing with cultural areas closer in.  Downtown workers are happy to take the car-free option when it's presented.  Either Blue Line extension we're discussing would boost the area around it and eventually spur development, with mroe portneital and a longer wait at Randall Park.     

 

       

We haven't built TOD in decades to the extent that other cities have for the reasons Strap noted. There aren't many market forces here shaping them -- no population growth, no job growth, no increase in wealth. The major geographic shifts are outward away from the urban core, although the region is getting older and poorer which does warrant subsidized housing around transit stops. The market forces SHOULD change, but they're not. We urbanites remain in the minority as our desires for the city are overshadowed by those who still believe that the next suburb to be built will better than the one built previously.

 

If we want something more transformative than small projects like the housing on Coltman in Little Italy, the scaled-down Flats East Bank, the truncated EcoVillage or the "died-on-the-drawing-board" Brookpark Station project, then we're going to have to subsidize the hell out of them by re-tasking existing housing incentive programs to transit stops. That's probably a good place to start, but it won't be transformative in the short term.

"The super expensive Avalon condos didn't do well because they're super expensive condos."

 

They really arent that expensive.  They are actually a fairly nice product for the price.  Im glad they didnt make them any more affordable for that area...

You're right, willyboy, Avalon's not that expensive.  They're just hurt for the same reason so much quality RE in Shaker is hurt: RE taxes thru the roof.  Why?  Because the Rapid is old and the city built out before auto/mall/suburban office age of the 60s/70s.  Unlike neighbor Beachwood, which was largely farmland until the 60s, went on to develop office parks to underwrite the low RE taxes.  Shaker, meanwhile, only has the sliver of land around Tower East and UH (the old OfficeMax), plus some area around Chagrin, Lee Avalon -- nothing compared to Beechwood or Mayfield Hts.

 

327, I agree the Red Line is stronger for TOD development.  It's a faster, grade-seperated route that can always market the quick, 1-seat ride to Hopkins... Actually, the new E. Cleve mayor is talking about commercial redevelopment around its 2 Red Line stations... I also agree, it's not all the lack of markets so much as it is the lack of leadership, here.  EcoCity Cleveland really lobbied hard for, not only the Eco Village as TOD, but initially for the rebuild of the ratty W. 65th Rapid, which RTA had slated to close.  Ron Tober used the lure of a then-unbuilt underground walkway to the Rapid to convince private/public leaders to build the 2 stadiums on the rather tight Gateway footprint -- no, not tradition TOD, but certainly development that benefits strongly from rail transit including it's very being, of course... Problem is, EcoCity was a small, green nonprofit (w/ limited pull amongst the giant, sloth-like banking/power-broker establishment here), and Ron Tober was chased out of town because of his 'extravagant' rail proposals; the bulk being commuter rail...

 

When your car-oriented leadership is constantly screaming that roads (a la Opportunity Corridor) are the way and transit is just a useless draw on the limited public treasure chest, well sure, transit can't work... again, the exact parallel is the Republican melodrama about the relative chump change we're getting from the Feds to start a passenger rail system that, once the public sees and experiences, is likely to grow -- in service and in speed... but until it happens, like with TOD, the "it can't happen here" Cleveland/Ohio mindset simply has to change.

 

... and to KJP and others, ... Chicago, a cold-weather, Industrial Age city like Cleveland and Detroit, didn't just happen out of thin air... it created the strong markets (in housing, business and transit) because of a mega, well-coordinated  can-do attitude that Cleveland can't even whiff... Closer to home (size wise, anyway, just a diff country), Toronto was a stagnant, stodgy, parochial town, too, until...

....until they capitalized on something. Toronto: the major banks leaving the politically troubled Quebec; Chicago: the growth of the airline industry after its 1978 deregulation; Denver: aerospace industry growth and many federal research centers are nearby; Minneapolis-St. Paul: it has 20 Fortune 500 companies most of which are growing like Target, Best Buy or Gander Mountain, plus old standby's like 3M and General Mills.

 

You're right. The growth didn't just come out of thin air. Usually some discovery of natural resources nearby triggers the growth or the city happens on a trend when several new companies grow into large employers at the same time. It's part luck and part initiative. Both have to happen.

 

Perhaps the study area for the Blue Line extension could tap into something to warrant new development along it. But just shifting around existing residents and jobs within the metro area probably isn't it.

"You're right, willyboy, Avalon's not that expensive.  They're just hurt for the same reason so much quality RE in Shaker is hurt: RE taxes thru the roof."

 

Well yeah, taxes are very high in Shaker, but I think Avalon has suffered more so because of the timing to market with the Financial crisis and all (and difficulty in getting condo financing), just as everything else has.   

Actually, Ferrari, Shaker's been working to try and develop TOD development for nearly 2 decades; some successful, others, like the 20-year-old strip mall Shaker Towne Center at Chagrin-Lee-Avalon, an absolute flop. It's hard; Shaker's an old burb that's been built up along the Rapid. The only open space for TOD along the Rapid in Shaker, is the open field in the Shaker Blvd median the 1 mile btw Warrensville and Green, and nobody wants to touch that restful, bucolic area in the midst of a busy suburban region... The 3 major pockets of high-rises along Van Aken -- Shaker Sq., the Lee Rd area, and Lynnfield-Farnsleigh, were all set asides by the Vans in the 20s, and developed with mid-rise apt blocks slowly over the decades into the early 60s.

 

Oh trust me I know, if anyone knows Shaker history its me, I have just about every book on the subject.  As for what you said about the strip of land between Warrensville and Green, damn straight we want it left like that.  The entire allure of Shaker is a garden city and yes we do not have office parks like Beachwood but they can keep Chagrin Highlands et. all and I will stick with the Shaker Lakes and the $3k per $100k taxes/anum all day.

 

I live between Shaker Blvd. and South Woodland right next to Courtland Blvd and I think the Green Line is fine.  I do wish they would concede Van Aken has lost its appeal as the bordering neighborhood went south post 1950s, and develop it with town homes and other creative uses, all the way from Shaker Square all the way to Van Aken/Warrensville/Chagrin.

 

As for Avalon Station, many factors terminated it, A. nobody can get condo loans without a 720 and five years of $50k plus income.  (single)  In addition, most young people who would buy a condo are going downtown if at all and thus the target group is empty nesters, do they want to pay the aforementioned $3k/100k taxes to subsidize a school district where 10% of the enrollees are not legal residents?  I would not. 

 

I will say this and drop it, shaker has a lot going for it but it has some looking in the mirror to do as far as what it wants to do.  Mayor Leiken is a smart fellow who is going about this the right way, his primary focus is developing the Van Aken/chargin area to raise the tax base.  He is also trimming back certain city services, some of which are REDUNKULOUS and should have been clipped long ago.

^I guess what I am saying is that at least on the cities Southern border, i.e. van aken, the city needs to give up on stemming the tide of urbanism.  Instead of being reactive, be proactive and develop the city in that area along the lines of Boston's Brookline which is its own municipality but has the MTA Green Line run through it that goes to B.C. (chestnut hill stops...)

Agreed that they should go for more density along Van Aken at this point.  Shaker Blvd still has the garden thing going, Van Aken not so much.  We need to get away from the idea that reasonably priced rentals = bad people.  Reasonably priced rentals also = young professionals.  It costs a lot just to get a career underway these days.  If we want to stem brain drain, we can't offer nothing but condos in our prime areas.

 

EcoVillage (btw that W65th station looks new) failed for the same reason as St Lukes... this city doesn't need more single family homes, regardless of how Eco they might be.  That's the wrong way to do TOD, and it shouldn't reflect poorly on Cleveland or TOD that bad plans for TOD don't work here.  Bad plans don't work period.  TOD should cater to those most interested in it... people who aren't ready to commit, or aren't able to commit, because they're not at that stage of life yet.  That stage of life comes later for the average person now, later still for the highly educated. 

 

Greater Cleveland has many neighborhoods with sufficiently dense rentals and street life.  Most were TOD at the time they were built.  Coventry, Shaker Square, Edgewater, etc.  These are the neighborhoods we recommend, the ones we show outsiders and the ones we often choose for ourselves.  Why does Cleveland refuse to repeat this obviously successful pattern? 

 

While other cities continue to build dense urban neighborhoods, we keep throwing single family homes around train stations and claiming TOD doesn't work, or claiming the problem is Cleveland.  Wrong.  The problem is bad development decisions being made in Cleveland.  Density does not mean smaller yards.  TOD requires attached housing, mixed use, and reasonably priced rentals.  I'm not making this up, I'm describing successful TOD that already exists in Cleveland.  These neighborhoods are so appealing and so functional in their design that many have remained popular long after their transit was removed.     

^Your points about young professionals and taking time to start careers etc. are right on the money.  I think many would love to live right near the rapid so they could work downtown.  I mean if given the option of moving to Willoughby (nothing wrong with willoughby) or living on a well intergrated and smartly developed TOD on Van Aken where you could go to work on the rapid, go to a Cavs game/browns game/indians game AND go to the airport ALL with no vehicle... not to mention Dave's supermarket on Shaker Square... it would be a nice alternative.  Not much need for an auto in that situation.

I too have high hopes for the reworked Van Aiken shopping district becoming the region's premiere suburban TOD.  All the ingredients are there- though maybe are held back a little by the total saturation of relatively high end retail already operating a few miles to east.

 

develop the city in that area along the lines of Boston's Brookline which is its own municipality but has the MTA Green Line run through it that goes to B.C. (chestnut hill stops...)

 

Funny- I like to daydream about this exact same comparison.  It's a really great development model tied to what is by far the highest ridership LRT system in the country.  I wonder, though if residents in the neighborhoods along Van Aiken can be convinced that world won't end if the building pattern there is changed and (the horror) some commercial development is permitted.  The other problem would be the cost of site acquisition- the existing homes and apartment buildings along Van Aiken would not be cheap...

 

 

^The land on the South side of Van Aken would be much cheaper to acquire, a good place to start.  The housing stock on the north side has some nice homes that in my opinion should stay.  I think you would find with the right PR campaign that residents of that area of Shaker would welcome development that would add a more vibrant mix of urbanism as opposed to the "thug" branded urbanism that has been creeping in for the last 50 years. 

I like Brookline, esp its commercial areas (like Coolidge Corner), and the number of condos and apt complexes.  But I don't think tearing down the single family homes and trying to spread density along Van Aken is the way to go.  We need to build out and maximize the the retail districts we have, which is what Shaker is attempting to do.  They did tear down those dingy, 1-story apts btw Lee and Avalon and, of course, built Avalon station -- where realtors there are telling people that once their occupancy rate reaches a certain level -- a level they claim are closing in on -- they will build a twin building on the other side of the boulevard off Van Aken.

 

I do understand that Cleveland has traditionally been a house city and expecting the city to suddenly convert to a mid-to-high rise city overnight, may be asking too much esp, as KJP notes, in a shrinking population market.  The attached, townhouse style (a la Eco City) houses or small, low/medium risers, like Fries & Schule and Larchmere Lofts, may be what we need right now in the neighborhoods.  Very few significant mid-rise buildings have been built outside of downtown (and even there, not that many)... I do think St. Luke's Pointe was anything but a TOD: it's just a suburban-like, cul-de-sac-y area shoved in next to a poor, struggling, high-crime area, and it, obviously, hasn't generated much excitement.  it's interesting that the relocated Harvey Rice elementary school has been built nearly right up on top of the E. 116 Rapid stop -- this is where St. Luke's point should have started.

"... and to KJP and others, ... Chicago, a cold-weather, Industrial Age city like Cleveland and Detroit, didn't just happen out of thin air... it created the strong markets (in housing, business and transit) because of a mega, well-coordinated  can-do attitude that Cleveland can't even whiff... Closer to home (size wise, anyway, just a diff country), Toronto was a stagnant, stodgy, parochial town, too, until... "

 

Another testimonial of why the Cleveland/N.E. Ohio inferiority complex is our biggest enemy. If we learn about the worth in our area economically, socially, culturally, historically, environmentally, etc...What role it had in shaping the nation and in any influence in the world.....  Such may produce a populace that has more pride in their area... to not allow it to be dragged down and self defeated. It all boils down to this.. We only save what we love..and we only love what we know. I always thought the schools should require such a study, that would get students to know all about their region in many ways. We are failing to turn out students who know such things about where they are from.

My mom asked me what I thought about this.

Railing for Blue Line extension: Sun Press Editorial

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunpress/2010/03/railing_for_blue_line_extensio.html

 

and there is a poll

By Sun  News staff

April 09, 2010,  6:02AM

As part of a reconfiguration of the Warrensville/Van Aken/Chagrin  Boulevard intersection in Shaker Heights, the RTA Blue Line rapid along  Van Aken will be extended to just past the intersection, which could  lead to an extension further east.

 

A Sun Press news poll: How far should the RTA Blue Line rapid be  extended?

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunpress/2010/04/a_sun_press_news_poll_how_far.html

 

 

 

An otherwise good editorial is negated by the gratuitous shot at the 3-C Amtrak proposal.  What's the Sun Press' point?  One has nothing to do with the other and their reasons for opposing it sound like talking points for Republican Bill Harris... Once again another Cleveland/Ohio opinion leader that simply doesn't get it about the value of transit and intercity regional rail.... HELLO SUN PRESS, did you stop for a second to think that the very Rapid transit you're advocating extending would connect your patrons directly with the 3-C trains helping hold down energy usage?  Stupid.

Send a letter to the editor. Mary Jane Skala likely wrote it. Address it directly to her at:

 

5510 Cloverleaf Parkway, Valley View, OH 44125

[email protected]

Send a letter to the editor. Mary Jane Skala likely wrote it. Address it directly to her at:

 

5510 Cloverleaf Parkway, Valley View, OH 44125

[email protected]

 

Mary Jane wrote that crap?  Then again, I shouldn't be surprised.  She's written boneheaded columns in the past, like her several "scare" articles about Shaker Square and, if I recall, how people prefer driving out to the mall.  So this 3-C cheapshot fits her M.O.  ... I'm on it.