^^I was thinking the same thing as I was reading KJP post.  Why go into the city as far E. 75th and then back out to the burbs to get to Windermere. 

In terms of ridership, I think an extension of the redline into Lakewood is far and away the lowest hanging fruit for rail expansion.

 

It's probably why they will be removed either by the city or by a developer.

 

Have you heard specific rumblings?  By "removed," I assume you mean bought out- I don't think eminent domain will be on the table.  I certainly hope a developer interested in this type of project is able to pry these properties away from current ownership if its not into it.

Id rather see a connection to lakewood from the 98 Street station; a extension south on west 25 or west on Lorain from the West 25 street station before anything like this is built!

 

So would a few other folks I've spoken to in the last few days. They wondered why these east-side transit projects (Blue Line extension, Red Line/HealthLine extension etc) keep getting proposed. The same people (east-siders, no less!) suggested extending a Red Line branch to Lakewood or a BRT to Parma.

HEY, don't criticize a Redline/Healthline extension on the east side!  :whip: I need that one to happen so I don't have to go through downtown to get from my house on Lakeshore to work at UC. But I'll agree that it's pathetic no one is looking at Lakewood.

^^I was thinking the same thing as I was reading KJP post.  Why go into the city as far E. 75th and then back out to the burbs to get to Windermere. 

 

Because it's probably the only way RTA could afford doing it.

 

In terms of ridership, I think an extension of the redline into Lakewood is far and away the lowest hanging fruit for rail expansion.

 

Lakewood would probably be the greatest beneficiary of a rail expansion, and the loudest opponent, too.

 

 

Have you heard specific rumblings?  By "removed," I assume you mean bought out- I don't think eminent domain will be on the table.  I certainly hope a developer interested in this type of project is able to pry these properties away from current ownership if its not into it.

 

I've heard nothing specifically. The owner of the shopping plaza on the north side is Deborah Ratner Salzberg. Yes, Ratner, as in Forest City Enterprises' Ratner. The owner of the plaza on the south side is Shaker Plaza Ltd., incorporated by John E. Fisher, Martin S. Wald, Lori Wald Friedberg, Eric D. Wald, and F. Heiser et al according Ohio Secretary of State records.

 

HEY, don't criticize a Redline/Healthline extension on the east side!  :whip: I need that one to happen so I don't have to go through downtown to get from my house on Lakeshore to work at UC. But I'll agree that it's pathetic no one is looking at Lakewood.

 

People are allowed to question such things, especially when RTA doesn't have the financial capacity right now to provide a local funding match to such projects. They are going to have a hard enough time coming up with the non-federal half of the $36 million total for the baseline alternative for the Blue Line, let alone for anything more grandiose.

They're not allowed by the FTA to fudge ridership numbers. The FTA heavily scrutinizes how these are calculated.

 

I don't doubt the ridership estimates are fair. I doubt RTA's dislike for a single-track rail extensions at the outer edges of its system. They consider it a safety issue, but it's not. Light rail systems in Pittsburgh, San Diego, Sacramento, Portland, Baltimore made it work, until they could get enough funding to double-track more sections. This is about GCRTA not trusting its train operators to obey operating rules, including not taking a train into opposing traffic on a single-track portion. Even so, the Automatic Train Stop signal system in use on the Red Line and soon to be installed west of Shaker Square will address this situation if installed on the rest of the Shaker lines including a single-track Blue Line extension.

 

If it were, a single-track Blue Line extension to Chagrin Highlands would cost only $55 million more than the baseline alternative and create enough additional benefits to pass the FTA's pass-fail cost effectiveness test. Thus a safe light rail extension is eligible to win funding.

 

Interesting....

 

I doubt RTA would fudge numbers, just take a more conservative spin... For example, I see a lot of potential in the Highlands, even though, as you noted, the Jacobs' screwed up density there... right now, nobody lives at or near  the Richmond/Harvard intersection, except Marriott hotel guests.  So there's plenty of room for high-density infil.  Those office buildings, though not directly at the interestection, are easy walking distance from it. ... with a little planning, and minor reconfiguration of the Harvard Park shopping Center, planners could develop a Crocker Park East, only with directly rail transit, larger/more significant office buildings and a large hotel.

 

It's kinda like the Van Sweringens -- in today's climiate, officials would have said they were crazy to build rail lines out to farmland, as they did in the 1910s; FTA would have nixed the project.  But of course, the Vans, and other foward-thinking transit builders planned for growth and, therefore, did not base plans merely on transporting the population that was already there ... b/c there were only 200 residents in Shaker Village when the 1st section of Green Line was built in 1913... It's not just RTA, but I feel there's a fundamental misunderstanding (esp in the Midwest) of what rapid transit can and should do.

Id rather see a connection to lakewood from the 98 Street station; a extension south on west 25 or west on Lorain from the West 25 street station before anything like this is built!

 

So would a few other folks I've spoken to in the last few days. They wondered why these east-side transit projects (Blue Line extension, Red Line/HealthLine extension etc) keep getting proposed. The same people (east-siders, no less!) suggested extending a Red Line branch to Lakewood or a BRT to Parma.

 

I think that's because people interested enough to study and comment on transit want to see our rail network grow regardless of what side of town it's on... present company, included.

Before I forgot, here's a December 2011 presentation by the City of Shaker Heights on the Van Aken District TOD....

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B1AfzcoG4M2TZTY1M2YyOTUtOWUwZC00NjAzLTg4NWQtNjA5YzUxNWExZGQz&hl=en_US

 

I'm with you clvlndr. Sadly, FTA won't give money for "promotional" transit lines (ie: those intended to create the land use conditions necessary to support transit). Your community either has to have the conditions already present before FTA will give your transit agency the money, or your transit agency has to take what it can get from the FTA and scale-up the land use density after each evolutionary advancement in transportation modal density.

 

Example: RTA asks for and gets FTA money for an express bus route, the community builds a couple of small-scale buildings near the bus stops. RTA asks for and gets FTA money to enhance the bus stops into full-scale BRT bus stations adaptable for rail, the community builds some larger, more mixed-use buildings near the stations. RTA asks for and gets FTA money to convert the bus service into for a double-track light-rail line, the community builds high-density TOD.

 

And by that time I may be too old to even notice.

 

Instead, here is what Utah did. Their conservative state government extended a TRAX light-rail line out into the boonies to stimulate transit oriented development. Since it wasn't federal money, it didn't have to go through the decade-long hoops of the phases of National Environmental Policy Act-required assessments.

 

Note the total lack of anything around much of this new light-rail line, shown in time-lapse video......

 

KJP, do you have a total amount it cost to construct that Utah line?

Does anybody know if RTA/local communities do anything with Re-connecting America/Interagency Partnership on Sustainable Communities?  I always wonder if they think beyond the specific project in the broader context of TOD.  There is usually a federal initative or partnership of agencies that colaborate and offer funding to advance these ideas.  I used to be involved and followed this pretty closely but havent looked into what kind of opportunities are out there for a while. 

 

The link below is for a white paper from late 2009.  These initatives would be a parnership between FTA, HUD, EPA etc.   

http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/091119_whitepaper.pdf

   

Well KJP, maybe we need to look beyond the Feds if we want to get it done -- ... We did it with the Waterfront Line because we needed it done fast, without Fed hoops to get it done in time for Cleveland Bicentennial.  Obviously the local climate was extremely favorable for getting state support for the WFL -- Voinovich was governor and was deeply interested in this project for his hometown, Mike White and Ron Tober (another Cleveland native) worked with the Bicentennial Commission to get it done IIRC... Also, Detroit has put together a group of businessmen, headed by Dan Gilbert, to finance a 4.5 mile LRT up Woodward from downtown.

 

I wish, here in Cleveland, we had someone in power who would champion Rapid Transit and rail expansion; someone like Dan Onorato who, as Allegheny County comptroller and Executive pushed hard for both the crosstown and North Shore LRT expansions in Pittsburgh (the latter is nearly finished).  Too bad we can't coax Betty Blair out of retirement and get her elected here in Cuyahoga County.  Her strong political/public voice for the West Shore Commuter rail was unique for these parts... Someone like that with influence (nee: a bully pulpit) would go a long way toward getting projects like the Blue Line done -- and, in this case, motivate local creative financing to bypass the FTA...

 

it just seems like a short rail extension such a no-brainer: 2 LRT terminals within 1.5 to 3 miles of our Outerbelt system... Perhaps the Baltimore approach, with stretches of single-track rail, out to the Hunt Valley Mall, is something RTA should look at in order to cut down costs.

I don't get it. Why is it always so hard to do anything with rail? Why can't GCRTA and/or developers push for the creation of a TIF zone near the stations and leverage bonds and skip the feds altogether? This seems like such a no-brainer to me.

Your guess is as good as mine, BuckeyB... It's so frustrating because Cleveland has the platform for a great transit network; cities looking to develop rail would give their eye-teeth for the infrastructure we have: (ie: Tower City, downtown-to-airport rail etc.)... And yet, the city has the history, since WWII, of producing more enemies of rail (Bert Porter, Norm Krumholz ... Lakewood), than we do champions of it.... not even Jane Campell, the mayor who grew up in Shaker and lived, as mayor, between/within walking distance of both the Blue and Green rapid lines.... I don't get it.

Before I forgot, here's a December 2011 presentation by the City of Shaker Heights on the Van Aken District TOD....

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B1AfzcoG4M2TZTY1M2YyOTUtOWUwZC00NjAzLTg4NWQtNjA5YzUxNWExZGQz&hl=en_US

 

I'm with you clvlndr. Sadly, FTA won't give money for "promotional" transit lines (ie: those intended to create the land use conditions necessary to support transit). Your community either has to have the conditions already present before FTA will give your transit agency the money, or your transit agency has to take what it can get from the FTA and scale-up the land use density after each evolutionary advancement in transportation modal density.

 

Example: RTA asks for and gets FTA money for an express bus route, the community builds a couple of small-scale buildings near the bus stops. RTA asks for and gets FTA money to enhance the bus stops into full-scale BRT bus stations adaptable for rail, the community builds some larger, more mixed-use buildings near the stations. RTA asks for and gets FTA money to convert the bus service into for a double-track light-rail line, the community builds high-density TOD.

 

And by that time I may be too old to even notice.

 

Instead, here is what Utah did. Their conservative state government extended a TRAX light-rail line out into the boonies to stimulate transit oriented development. Since it wasn't federal money, it didn't have to go through the decade-long hoops of the phases of National Environmental Policy Act-required assessments.

 

Note the total lack of anything around much of this new light-rail line, shown in time-lapse video......

 

 

Couldn't help but notice that they let people walk across the tracks to access center stations, instead of requiring massive over/underpass stations.  Maybe people in Utah are just smart enough to cross rail tracks.

Your guess is as good as mine, BuckeyB... It's so frustrating because Cleveland has the platform for a great transit network; cities looking to develop rail would give their eye-teeth for the infrastructure we have: (ie: Tower City, downtown-to-airport rail etc.)... And yet, the city has the history, since WWII, of producing more enemies of rail (Bert Porter, Norm Krumholz ... Lakewood), than we do champions of it.... not even Jane Campell, the mayor who grew up in Shaker and lived, as mayor, between/within walking distance of both the Blue and Green rapid lines.... I don't get it.

 

I think this true of Ohio as a whole, not just Cleveland and again, I don't get it. I do think that, we, as TOD/transit advocates have to present an alternative to the federal transit funding route and be very vocal about it. The status quo simply is not acceptable! :x

^^I bet their buses don't even tell you when they're turning left.

 

Regarding alternative funding mechanisms: I'm pretty skeptical that a TIF could be used to finance rail expansion in the Cleveland burbs.  I just don't see rail adding enough taxable value given the indifference most homebuyers/developers seem to have towards rail.  It's one thing to say Jacobs lacked vision, but another to say he was actually leaving serious money on the table by not eagerly embracing rail.  And I would definitely not be in favor of diverting scarce city/county dollars to an extension meant primarily to serve exurban drivers.  Without a major federal pork injection, I'd put a big Blue Line extension way down the priority list.  JMO.

StrapHanger is absolutely right about TIF's.  Given what's happened with land values I don't expect them to be as popular as they once were.  And even ideally, TIF's just add some sugar on top, they don't serve as primary financing.

 

I think the blue line extension should be a relatively high priority, and I believe it will be far more useful to city residents seeking work than to suburban commuters.  So why isn't rail getting more support?  Terrible, terrible, terrible leadership.  RTA's last two big projects, the WFL and the BRT, are widely viewed as flops.  My issues with the BRT are detailed in other threads, but regardless of its merits, it should never have been pursued with the WFL seeming so pointless, wasteful and incomplete only a few years after construction. 

 

The big picture has been missed on every level.  RTA should never have shifted its focus away so quickly... the city should never have allowed what happened to the flats after such a large public investment there... and the county right now should be insisting that our new tax-funded convention center connect to the tax-funded rail line right in front of it.  Leadership got us into this mess, and only leadership can get us out.   

327, I agree with most of your points, except re the WFL.  There should have been better planning coordinated with the WFL to develop TOD around WFL stations, much like what is FINALLY happening at Flats East Bank (btw, I agree w/ your recent comment in the FEB thread about the foolish futility in tearing down the whole neighborhood to rebuilt the current Wolstein/Fishman project)... Don't forget, our Waterfront should be prime residential/retail land.  At least, when the old Flats was in its heyday in the late 90s, the WFL was well used on Friday and Sat nights (and RTA even extended service in the summer months to handle late night crowds).

 

So what happened development-wise along the WFL since it opened in 1996? 

 

- The old football-only stadium was replaced with a new, open air one which had the same limited use (about 10-12 dates per year) -- so with Indy reaping the excitement of a Super Bowl in a few days, how would (at least) a domed stadium looked in terms of all the other uses possible: concerts, NCAA final 4s, Super Bowls, even some convention exhibits....

 

- a promising large-scale apt/condo mixed us project called Davenport Bluffs was planned for the Muny Lot end-of-the WFL line... but infighting and controversy doomed that project, so that, instead, in its place we got 2 fortress-type, people unfriendly buildings in it's place: the regional FBI HQ, and Channel 3...

 

- even with the Lake-blocking stadium several plans have come 'n gone for high-density residential development around the stadium.

 

- at the mouth of the Cuyahoga, there was a plan for an extensive condo, apt, townhouse development -- to date, the planned relocation of the Port Authority has stalled and nothing has been built.

 

- ... and of course, what little entertainment/restaurant activity that was in the Flats has died...

 

My point?  I think we aim at the wrong target w/ the WFL.  Was it the ideal, top-priority rail project RTA should have developed?  of course not; RTA and the City should have thrown it's weight behind Dual Hub,... but of course they didn't, it died and now we have Health Line buses.  But since we did decided to make this (highly rare) rail extension along the Waterfront, it was incumbent upon the city leaders to develop the adjacent land to help both the WFL and downtown, generally, to be successful.... and, as we see, the effort has resulted in less-than-zero so, quite naturally, trains run empty outside of Browns' games and a few other scattered special events...

327, I agree with most of your points, except re the WFL.  There should have been better planning coordinated with the WFL to develop TOD around WFL stations, much like what is FINALLY happening at Flats East Bank (btw, I agree w/ your recent comment in the FEB thread about the foolish futility in tearing down the whole neighborhood to rebuilt the current Wolstein/Fishman project)... Don't forget, our Waterfront should be prime residential/retail land.  At least, when the old Flats was in its heyday in the late 90s, the WFL was well used on Friday and Sat nights (and RTA even extended service in the summer months to handle late night crowds).

 

So what happened development-wise along the WFL since it opened in 1996? 

 

- The old football-only stadium was replaced with a new, open air one which had the same limited use (about 10-12 dates per year) -- so with Indy reaping the excitement of a Super Bowl in a few days, how would (at least) a domed stadium looked in terms of all the other uses possible: concerts, NCAA final 4s, Super Bowls, even some convention exhibits....

 

- a promising large-scale apt/condo mixed us project called Davenport Bluffs was planned for the Muny Lot end-of-the WFL line... but infighting and controversy doomed that project, so that, instead, in its place we got 2 fortress-type, people unfriendly buildings in it's place: the regional FBI HQ, and Channel 3...

 

- even with the Lake-blocking stadium several plans have come 'n gone for high-density residential development around the stadium.

 

- at the mouth of the Cuyahoga, there was a plan for an extensive condo, apt, townhouse development -- to date, the planned relocation of the Port Authority has stalled and nothing has been built.

 

- ... and of course, what little entertainment/restaurant activity that was in the Flats has died...

 

My point?  I think we aim at the wrong target w/ the WFL.  Was it the ideal, top-priority rail project RTA should have developed?  of course not; RTA and the City should have thrown it's weight behind Dual Hub,... but of course they didn't, it died and now we have Health Line buses.  But since we did decided to make this (highly rare) rail extension along the Waterfront, it was incumbent upon the city leaders to develop the adjacent land to help both the WFL and downtown, generally, to be successful.... and, as we see, the effort has resulted in less-than-zero so, quite naturally, trains run empty outside of Browns' games and a few other scattered special events...

 

I think maybe a problem with the WFL is that it was a project done in haste that was not seen as the first step toward more light rail transit in the Cleveland metro area. I can't be too critical of of the WFL line itself; the Flats were quite different when the line was built. However, the next logical step would have been to close the downtown loop and extend the Blue line to I-271 and the Red Line to Berea. I also think that we should forgo federal transit money to expidite the process, should proposed lines not meet federal criteria. It's up to us and others to make the case for that.

Lest we get off-track, my personal suggestions where we should be focusing our efforts are....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2768.msg600895.html#msg600895

BTW, I hear that only two people attended the second of two Blue Line public meetings held last night. About 15 people attended the first meeting.

It could be the fact that people may feel that the fix is in; a plan has been chosen regardless of their voice... I tend to feel that way, myself, and why I didn't attend.

From an e-mailed PR........

 

For Immediate Release

 

CONTACT:

Vicki Blank

[email protected]

216-491-1412

 

VAN AKEN DISTRICT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) PHASE ONE: FINAL PIECE FALLS INTO PLACE

$4.4M Award Completes Roadway Project Funding

 

SHAKER HEIGHTS (February 10, 2012) – Decades of dreaming, years of planning, months of collaborative effort among national and local agencies, and countless hours of hard work by Shaker Heights officials have resulted in the completion of funding, in the amount of $18.5M, for the first stage of redevelopment of the Van Aken district: the reconfiguration of the Warrensville/Van Aken intersection.

 

The last piece of funding was secured at the end of January when the District One Public Works Integrating Committee accepted the staff recommendation and approved a grant of $4.4M.

 

The City leveraged its own investment of $2.3M into an extraordinary patchwork of funding from sources sold on the City’s conviction that a transit-oriented redevelopment will transform the district into a vibrant, mixed use downtown destination. Assembling the six layers of funding was achieved through the cooperation of Shaker Heights and the Cuyahoga County Department of Public Works, with the support of Senator Sherrod Brown and Representative Marcia Fudge. Other funding sources include:

 

+ $4M  Ohio Department of Transportation

+ $7M Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency

+ $500K Federal 2010 Appropriation

+ $500K Federal Highway Administration

+ $500K Cuyahoga County Department of Public Works

 

Plans for the Van Aken district began to take shape in 2000 with the creation of the City’s Strategic Investment Plan, an effort led by Urban Design Associates (UDA) of Pittsburgh. The plan engaged hundreds of residents and developed a shopping list of initiatives, with the vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use downtown on a network of urban streets. In 2008, the City crafted the Warrensville/Van Aken Transit-Oriented Development Plan with the consultant team of The Planning Partnership and URS. The Transit-Oriented Development Plan implements the earlier vision to revitalize the area into a vibrant mixed-use district through:

 

+ Reconfiguration of the intersection from six legs to four legs;

+ Creation of infill development parcels for private sector investment;

+ Extension of the rapid transit line through the intersection;

+ Construction of a new, end-of-the-line Intermodal Transit Center; and

+ Development of 500 housing units, 160,000 square feet of retail, 250,000 square feet of office and community green space.

 

The road reconfiguration is the first step in realizing this vision. In late 2013, Shaker residents and business owners can expect to see the first changes planned for the Van Aken district. The intersection, where six roads now converge, has long been the bane of area drivers and pedestrians. The reconfiguration will create a standard four-way intersection, reducing wait times, confusion and congestion, and improving safety.

 

To achieve improvements to the intersection, construction will entail the relocation of Northfield Road to the south and closing Van Aken Boulevard at Farnsleigh. Also planned in the first phase are upgrades to roads, transit access, pedestrian facilities, and streetscapes, including tree planting. Prominent crosswalks will improve the pedestrian experience, making a once dangerous intersection easy to navigate and facilitating easy access to all corners of the district.

 

The City’s recently adopted Economic Development and Marketing plans further map out a strategy for attracting businesses and developers to the new Van Aken district. Resolving the problematic intersection has long been viewed as the critical first step toward creation of a new development in Shaker Heights – one in which residential, retail, and office space will generate new jobs and new sources of revenue. Future phases of the redevelopment include a .3 mile extension of the RTA Blue Line through the intersection to the Intermodal Transit Center, a $36.6M project which will position the area as a transportation hub. Greater Cleveland RTA (GCRTA) recently completed the study for the Blue Line Corridor Extension.

 

Shaker’s historic past as one of the first transit-oriented communities built around two light rail lines comes full circle with this first step toward a transit-oriented redevelopment of the Van Aken district.

 

For additional information, please contact Planning Director Joyce Braverman at 216-491-1432. Low resolution art attached. For a high resolution version of the image, please contact Ms. Braverman.

 

###

 

About the City of Shaker Heights:

Just eight miles from downtown Cleveland, Shaker Heights is a tranquil, yet cosmopolitan and distinctive first-ring suburb of 28,000 residents. Developed in the Garden City style (1905-1935) as one of the country’s first planned, transit-oriented communities, Shaker Heights is linked to downtown by two GCRTA rapid transit lines. Every home in the City is a 10-15 minute walk from a transit station. It has a national reputation for excellent schools, extraordinary natural beauty, architecturally exquisite homes and superior city services. Shaker Heights is Cleveland’s premier suburb – with tree-lined neighborhoods and miles of sidewalks that invite residents to stroll, chat with each other, and stay for a lifetime! Visit shakeronline.com for more information.

A long time Shaker resident tells us that this plan has actually been kicking around SH for decades... glad to see it's finally being executed.  I sure hope at least 1/2 of the planned high-density housing units can be constructed. 

I just don't get it.

 

why does RTA have to add so many bells and whistles to a Starter LRT extension?

 

Alternatives Total Capital Cost Annual Operating Cost Cost per Hour of User Benefit

Baseline $36.30 Million $4.51 Million $19.43

Harvard Light Rail $144.85 Million $6.57 Million $40.53

Harvard Bus Rapid Transit $76.26 Million $5.63 Million $34.82

Northfield Light Rail $187.79 Million $6.56 Million $58.59

Northfield Bus Rapid Transit $82.49 Million $5.65 Million $40.02

Warrensville Light Rail $198.39 Million $6.84 Million $76.94

Warrensville Bus Rapid Transit $57.17 Million $5.75 Million $34.49

 

why do they need to reconfigure the corridor?  street running on a road as uncongested as Harvard and Northfield are,  is possible and wise.

 

why is double tracking needed.

 

Northfield LRT is a 4.1 km extension and $187.79 million 45.8 milion/KM

 

Harvard LRT is 5 km extension $144.85 million 28.97 million/KM

 

Cincinnati streetcar is a 6.6km all new system  that costs 95 million,  14.39 per KM

 

Maintenance costs are also much higher than Newer LRT systems,  Cincy's cost are 2.5 million per year.

 

If built as a minimum needs LRT system the cost of the Harvard LRT option would be 72 million single tracked Northfield would be  59 million

 

 

 

why does RTA have to add so many bells and whistles to a Starter LRT extension?

 

why is double tracking needed.

 

 

Because RTA doesn't trust its drivers to obey trackside signals, and the automatic train stop signal system that RTA could install to protect against human error is equal to the cost of adding the second track.

 

As for running trains in the pavement of the existing street, I don't think RTA's culture allows that kind of thinking. Yet.

Nice article and graphics....

 

Shaker's town center retrofit: Inside the $44M plan

Submitted by Marc Lefkowitz  |  Last edited March 16, 2012 - 2:16pm

 

Cities, like corporations, project an image. Put another way, cities have ‘a brand’. Brands attract customers, or residents, who express their affinity to the brand when they buy or rent a place. Shaker Heights. Just say the name and it conjures images. Great Tudor mansions, tidy Colonials with expensive cars parked in the drive, well-kempt yards.

 

But when thinking about Shaker’s commercial districts, it’s hard to call up a similar image. That’s because Shaker, admittedly, is dominated by drive-by strip centers. Many Shaker residents, it turns out, don’t like that disconnect between the high-end classicism of residential architecture and the shabbiness of their commercial centers.

 

“What’s interesting about Shaker,” says city planning director Joyce Braverman, “is the commercial districts were built later, and didn’t have the same character.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/shaker-town-center-retrofit-inside-plan

Nice article about the Warr-Van Aken development.  Even though the writer mentions Shaker Towne Center, it doesn't detail how ineffective that 22 year old rebuild was, in essentially creating a strip shopping center on the North side of the street after demolishing buildings that addresed the sidewalk and had parking in the rear... He does make interesting points about the demographics in the immediate area of Warr-Van Aken as well as the suburb's residence of individuals knowledgable about modern urban planning.

As to KJP's point about RTA not trusting it's drivers to obey single-track signals, ... it speaks volumes about the training, or lack-thereof, of RTA drivers, and that's sad... Baltimore's 20-year old LRT was, until recently, mostly single-track; they've since double-tracked most of it (save the Hunt Valley extension and the short stub branch into Penn Station).  IIRC Balto's LRT used old-fashion track-side signals like most of the Blue/Green Lines... To my knowledge, there were no head-on collisions in Baltimore on single track sections.

As to KJP's point about RTA not trusting it's drivers to obey single-track signals, ... it speaks volumes about the training, or lack-thereof, of RTA drivers, and that's sad... Baltimore's 20-year old LRT was, until recently, mostly single-track; they've since double-tracked most of it (save the Hunt Valley extension and the short stub branch into Penn Station).  IIRC Balto's LRT used old-fashion track-side signals like most of the Blue/Green Lines... To my knowledge, there were no head-on collisions in Baltimore on single track sections.

 

I think it more to it than just that?  What about Federal/State mandates/laws?  Union issues with that?  and overall "perception" of safety.  I'm not saying these things are fact, just throwing them out there.

As to KJP's point about RTA not trusting it's drivers to obey single-track signals, ... it speaks volumes about the training, or lack-thereof, of RTA drivers, and that's sad...

 

That's one way to look at it. The opposing view, and it's the one I take, is that I think it speaks more about management. Whether their mistrust is unjustified, or they haven't adequately trained drivers, the responsibility falls on management.

this is portland's LRT system the MAX

 

this is portland's LRT system the MAX

 

 

I've heard of that. ;)

Here's an update on a project being spearheaded by the City of Shaker Heights to use transit access to help expand their taxbase. I missed this article when it came out......

 

Shaker Council sets aside $50,000 for Van Aken "pre-development" activities

By Thomas Jewell, Sun News

on October 08, 2013 at 10:52 AM, updated October 08, 2013 at 11:05 AM

 

SHAKER HEIGHTS, Ohio -- On the heels of an executive session to discuss property acquisition Monday, City Council appropriated $50,000 for "pre-development costs" in the Van Aken business district.

 

Asked if there was any connection between the two, Shaker Heights Mayor Earl Leiken said "there could be," but declined to elaborate at this point.

 

City Economic Development Director Tania Menesse told council at an Oct. 7 special meeting that with an $18.5 million state and federally-funded roadway reconfiguration project set for next year, the city needs some flexibility on its end.

 

These "readily-available dollars" will cover "preparatory development activities" that could include environmental studies, appraisals, surveys, options and down payments.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/shaker-heights/index.ssf/2013/10/shaker_council_sets_aside_5000.html

 

 

There's a slightly older article with more detail here:

http://www.cleveland.com/shaker-heights/index.ssf/2013/08/shaker_heights_hires_bond_coun.html

 

 

The project is in reference to this, for which phase 1 is fully funded......

 

Van Aken District

http://shakeronline.com/departments/planning/van-aken

 

 

 

 

 

And this is the developer Shaker Heights is working with on this project:

 

Berusch Development Partners

http://www.berusch.com/municipalities/van-aken.php

 

Van Aken District Redevelopment

SHAKER HEIGHTS, OH

SITUATION

The City of Shaker Heights is a vibrant community of stunning architecture and a growing business base. At its southeastern edge is one of Ohio’s busiest intersections. The site should be an appealing gateway. Instead it is home to a largely vacant retail strip that is conspicuously underwhelming. The City is working with Berusch Development Partners to craft a compelling and financially feasible plan to transform the area, and create a dynamic mixed-use development of scale.

 

CHALLENGE

Shaker Heights has faced myriad obstacles in transforming the Van Aken district. For decades high real estate taxes and disjointed street, rail and property ownership patterns stymied meaningful reinvestment or redevelopment. More recently the area suffered from high site costs, limited financing options, and questions about its market potential.

 

STATUS & RESULTS

Berusch Development Partners became the development advisor in 2012. Working with City staff, lay leadership and property owners, the firm strategically and methodically led the development of a viable district development plan. Key to the process was a written understanding that Berusch negotiated with a key property owner that calls for construction of a mixed-use, walkable development containing apartments, retail and office space, a parking garage, and planned public space. The development is expected to vastly improve the quality of place in this gateway district and lead to more private investment, jobs and tax dollars.

 

Negotiations are underway for definitive public-private partnership agreements and a multi-layered financing plan. Groundbreaking is targeted for May 2014.

 

Project Specs

+ Budget: $65 million

+ 120 apartments

+ 100,000 square feet of retail space

+ 35,000 square feet of office space

+ 300-car parking garage

+ Considerable amount of planned public space.

+ Scheduled Completion: 2015

That second picture seems like a pipe dream.  I can't imagine there being enough demand to fill all of that retail, office, and residential development.  I hope I'm wrong though. 

That second picture seems like a pipe dream.  I can't imagine there being enough demand to fill all of that retail, office, and residential development.  I hope I'm wrong though. 

 

Over what time frame? Maybe we'll fill it out in five years or 25 years. Maybe never. That doesn't matter. The plan right now is to develop the project according to the specs listed above (120 apartments, etc). That appears to constitute phase one. I'll worry about what comes next after phase one is opened to test the market.

Just to clarify, I'm pretty sure Berusch is only a consultant on this deal (same one who worked on Uptown), not the developer. As far as I know, there's been very little made public about the intentions of the current owner(s) of this land. Presumably, all this planning activity by the city indicates that the owner(s) is/are on board for some sort of redevelopment (or to sell), but who knows. The only construction work that seems anywhere close to imminent is the intersection reconfiguration: http://shakeronline.com/assets/downloads/city-plans/vanakenschematicplan.pdf, which won't really touch the blah shopping plazas.

 

I definitely share the enthusiasm for the concept of redevelopment here, but one thing that has always puzzled me is how underwhelming all the visioning documents have been for this exercise. When you're trying to sell a vision, why would you just scatter some crappy looking gabled roofs and gray slabs around some random green spaces?  It's not like they need something super polished, but they could at least make it look like they care about design a little bit. Unfortunately, Shaker Towne Centre makes me worry how up to the task city hall is in this department.

OK, that makes more sense. I was getting conflicting information from Berusch's website in terms of what role they play in developments. BTW, the property owners of those strip malls at Van Aken and Warrensville are actually Ratner family members -- as in the Forest City Ratners. The retail strips may have been built by Forest Enterprises but it's no longer owned by the company.

Over what time frame? Maybe we'll fill it out in five years or 25 years. Maybe never. That doesn't matter. The plan right now is to develop the project according to the specs listed above (120 apartments, etc). That appears to constitute phase one. I'll worry about what comes next after phase one is opened to test the market.

 

I don't know what time frame, but they better not be thinking too long-term because I'm not sure doing so makes sense considering demographic trends in that area.  Also, that is a very heavily-traveled intersection and I doubt that's going to change much no matter what they do to it, but those sketches seem to be ignoring that reality to some degree as well.  I really do hope that that the area itself becomes a destination built around transit-oriented development but my gut tells me that this will still primarily be a pass-though, mostly for folks trying to get to one freeway or another.

 

Also wasn't there talk of moving one of the SH libraries over there?  That would be a nice start.

I don't understand the correlation between demographics and implementation time frames. Also high traffic is used by developers to convince lenders of a market to tap. Did you read what Berusch had to say about that?

I don't understand the correlation between demographics and implementation time frames. Also high traffic is used by developers to convince lenders of a market to tap. Did you read what Berusch had to say about that?

 

The point is that that area needs something sooner rather than later.  The longer they wait and the more demographics change in that area the more difficult it may be to attract the types of businesses that they probably want to make some of those renderings a reality.

Or maybe the demographics will be better. You don't know. I don't know. What I do know is that it's a city. It's not the weather. And thus only humans can decide what it's future in the months, years, decades and centuries to come. No one else can.

 

So let's see what the people involved do next. Maybe some of us will choose to get involved. It will be interesting to see no matter what.

FWIW, Berusch is who is developing the Euclid 115 apartment conversion, across the street from Uptown. Russell Berusch consulted on the Uptown project as part of his (now former) role as the development director at Case. He has a strong history of working with projects that require public/private finacing mixes, tax credits, etc.

 

Edit: Also, if I'm not mistaken, I think the strip mall is owned by the Ratner / Miller entity that manages their private (non FC) investments (RMS Investments). At least they did 2 years ago

An update on Shaker Heights' new "downtown" to be built starting next year (after the Warrensville-Chagrin-Van Aken-Northfield intersection is simplified for $18 million this year)......

 

http://www.cleveland.com/shaker-heights/index.ssf/2014/06/shaker_heights_van_aken_distri.html#incart_river

 

Shaker Heights' Van Aken district redevelopment to create hundreds of new jobs, housing units

By Chanda Neely, Northeast Ohio Media Group

on June 03, 2014 at 12:36 AM, updated June 03, 2014 at 2:58 PM

 

SHAKER HEIGHTS, Ohio -- Just how much economic development is happening outside downtown Cleveland? To find out, Northeast Ohio Media Group and The Plain Dealer collected information about more than 100 economic development projects in the suburbs. Here is the biggest current project in Shaker Heights.

 

Development: The Van Aken district redevelopment will include construction of 100,000 square feet of retail space, 160 luxury apartments and 30,000 square feet of office space along the Van Aken Blue Line.

 

Type: mixed use

 

Address: Van Aken Shopping Center, Farnsleigh Road lot and westbound Van Aken Boulevard

 

Estimated cost: $64 million

 

Developer: RMS Investment Corporation

 

Owners: RMS and the city of Shaker Heights

 

Time frame: Construction will begin next year and run through 2017.

 

Number of jobs created: More than 370

 

###

I don't usually applaud new street construction. But this is the relocation of Northfield Road in Shaker Hts, part of an $18M project to turn a 6-way intersection of Northfield/Van Aken, Warrensville an Chagrin into a 4-way for the Van Aken District TOD.

Very positive.  It looks like Shaker Heights just may get the TOD thing right this time, unlike car-oriented Shaker Towne Center 1.5 miles west on Chagrin.  Glad to see this project getting off the ground.

Very positive.  It looks like Shaker Heights just may get the TOD thing right this time, unlike car-oriented Shaker Towne Center 1.5 miles west on Chagrin.  Glad to see this project getting off the ground.

 

At least the Lee Rd/Van Aken RTA stop reconstruction is finally underway.

I don't usually applaud new street construction. But this is the relocation of Northfield Road in Shaker Hts, part of an $18M project to turn a 6-way intersection of Northfield/Van Aken, Warrensville an Chagrin into a 4-way for the Van Aken District TOD.

 

I drive by this new road every day but never realized that this was the Northfield re-route. I sure hope that this does not put too much more congestion on that part of Warrensville Center Road.

 

http://www.shakeronline.com/departments/planning/van-aken/van-aken-on-track

 

Van Aken on Track:

Traffic Update

Northfield Road Closing; Follow New Traffic Pattern

September 11, 2014

 

The planned closing of Northfield Road at Chagrin Boulevard is scheduled the week of September 15. The closure is the next phase of the Van Aken district road recon-figuration project.

 

Access to Northfield southbound will be from Warrensville Center Road, just north of the Post Office on the newly relocated Northfield.

 

Northbound traffic will be detoured to the newly relocated Northfield. To access University Hospitals Management Services Center, use entrance on Warrensville Center. To access the BP station and Tower East, use entrances on Chagrin. Detour signs and message boards will be in place throughout the area. This detour is expected to continue through December 2014.

 

Expect delays when traveling through construction zones. For more information, call 216-752-9047.

I'm glad to see this important project moving forward... In the meantime, what's up with the extension of the Blue Line across to Northfield Rd?  I haven't heard anything on this lately... Is FTA money forthcoming and, if not, why not?

I'm glad to see this important project moving forward... In the meantime, what's up with the extension of the Blue Line across to Northfield Rd?  I haven't heard anything on this lately... Is FTA money forthcoming and, if not, why not?

 

I'm hearing rumblings that the funding will be tough to come by.