This a test

Ok, besides adding a bunch of nonsense to the first column in my template (tell me if it is a waste of time and I may get rid of it) I am trying out this new mac desktop widget to post this.

By the way, I want to thank everyone who gives a crap about what is going on in the city for reading this... knowledge is power

Live Blogging from the Cleveland Innerbelt Community Meeting

This is a first for me.
I am going to try and do a live blog.

We are at Myers University.

The room is packed.
Easily over 200 people.

Bob Brown is welcoming everyone.

9:15 am

Brown is giving us a primer on the what has happened over the past few years.
(It is good to see a nice turnout by the media)
Brown: "Our hope is that we can all learn from each other at todays meeting... keep open minds... have a safe innnerbelt for the next 50, or so years."

Introduces Jim Havilan, MidTown Cleveland, Inc.

9:20

Haviland: ODOT suggested that the public give there presentation before they do (by Gordon Proctor).
The importance of today's meeting.
-Well-defined issues
-Timing, The mayor wants a resolution
-The larger community must take a position

The goal of the meeting
-present outstanding points
-allow for informed decision making
-present a solution

9:25

History of Community Concerns in the Trench
(much of what is being said now is common knowledge for those who have been staying informed over the past few years; however it is good they are going over it)

History of Community Participation
Since December 2003, the community has maintained the need to keep Carnegie and Prospect access.
Many public meetings since then.
Jul 2005, ODOT rejects community position on trench.

9:30

History of Community Compromises
-St. Clair and Lakeside ramp closures
-West 14th and Abbey
-Innerbelt Bridge
-Quigley

Unresolved Community Points of Conflict (as of November, 2005)
-Removal of Carnegie Ave exit, eastbound
-Closure of Prospect entrance nad exit
-Close current Chester exit, westbound

9:35

Haviland walks us through ODOT's Alternative Trench Configuration (No payne Avenue Connection)
"We challange ODOT on how this is a better alternative."
Possible scenarios involving special events traffic, accidents, business location/relocation.

9:44

Procedural Points of Conflict
-Incomplete Economic Impact Study (marginal, at best)
-No traffic models

Acton requested by the Community
-Convene new series of Innerbelt Trench working meeting over a 60 day period to identify a design alternative that acheives an improved innerbelt without widespread economic and community damage.

Bob Brown introduces Gordon Proctor, Director of ODOT

9:48
He is talking about all of the projects that have been done by ODOT over the past few years.
Invite for a field trip to Columbus to observe a finished project.

Access and Crashes
-Central interchange is #1 for freeway crashes statewide
-787 crashes a year
-2 a day
-Annual cost of $12 million

"Not good for the people, not good for business."

-over a third of the accidents are during the afternoon rush
-1/3 are city residents
-1/3 are county residents

Shows a nice slide with an above ground view with little dots showing where the accidents have happened over the past three years (very impressive and convincing graphic)

9:57

Regarding Prospect and Carnegie ramps
"It is like trying to fix a sidewalk in an old neighborhood with many trees."
-Walker Weeks and Juvy Court, cannot be taken due to historic designation (legalality)
-Explains what is trying to be done in regards to accomidating I-77 north and Carnegie.
-Cannot look at those two ramps witout realizing how the rest of the interchange is impacted by the inclusion/exclusion of said ramps.

10:05
Introduces Craig Hebrebrand, project manager
"Comes down to this, five years we have worked with the city and the issue comes down to solving the Carnegie Curve area... is there a solution?"
-Walks us through the area again.
-Talks about the known bottlenecks from Metro Curve, up.
-The Carnegie Curve area needs to be cleaned up in order to service the the other traffic coming from 71, 77 and 90.
-Shows November, 2005 recomendations
--Split access at Payne/Chester
--Frontage road jogs at Prospect
--Frontage road ends at Carnegie

Proposed Refinements, February 2006
-Consolidated access at Chester Avenue
-Straighten Frontage Road at Prospect
-Extend Frontage Rd to Cedar Avenue

10:17

(It looks as if the Chester ramps will remain and be improved. Nice.)
Gloria Ferris is here and pointed out to Craig, that he avoided talking about the yellow sections of the graphic, which, of course, are the proposed takings.

Back to Proctor

They wanted to have a model available with computer animation showing traffic, but there were technical difficulties... they will provide later; perhaps place it on the website. (That will be helpful.)

Urban Design and Aesthetic Enhancements
-points out the vandal fencing, the color (gray) and lack of landscaping
-shows a slide of a bridge in Dublin, Ohio and the bridges in Newburgh Hts (77)
-states these bridges are more inviting
-shows bridge in Columbus, High Street (I-670). The city found devolper who then built structures on the bridge... retail.
-In regards to economic study: there has never been an economic study done before in Ohio... this will be the first.
-ODOT does not have a history of doing it... they are doing the best they can do.

Back to Craig about economic study

10:33

Access and Economics
-shows timing w/o Carnegie and Prospect ramps
--general increases overall... (small, but still and increase)
--"No significant change in overall employment."
---existing employment 30,000
---0.2% increase = 70 jobs

Influence of Opportunity Corridor
-the corridor will not influence traffic positively or negatively
-the further away from 55th and I490, the less influence

Rap-up by Proctor

Verification of Recommendation
-ODOT to review our recommendation
-FHWA to conduct "independent" review of ODOT's recommendation

10:42

Back to Brown for comments and questions by the public

They can be directed to anyone in the room
rules:
-identify yourself
-identify who you are directing the quesation to.
-three minutes
-only discussing the trench issues

KUCINCH REPRESENTATIVE (Marty Gelfand)
-Procedural question to proctor regarding impacts
-how can you explain no impact with all of the ramp closures
--Proctor: depends on wether DC will say there is a environmental or economic impact
-when does the process start?
--it started five years ago, the formal submittals should be this year

Gerry Martin, resident
-against closing Carnegie
-wants a promise that there will be no accidents on the side streets instead of the freeway
--Proctor:crashes go down about 30%
They have not begun to study I71 yet, there will be some consolidation

Ed "Citizen" Hauser
-Submitted 13 request regarding public process
-process has been changed dramatically
-public comment period is over, yet portions of the process continue
-specifically, the bridge
-we need the reports, then we can comment - then make decisions
-reopen the process
Proctor: your emails were so numerous and detailed... we will respond
-the process has been working - over 3oo meetings
-the southern allignment is vastly more complex
-the tie-ins will impact traffic greatly
-closures could last 2-4 years, Toledo
-once the bridge is done, other freeways will have to be closed periodically
-as part of the analysis and discussion, which has been entered in the public record, the northern allignment has the least amount of impact
-a design team has been picked, there will be a signature bridge
-the report you ask for does not exist in the format you request, it will come

Mike Cheslar, Cheslar Group
-The presentation was terrific
-shocked at the lack of economic impact understanding
-the one page questionere was lacking
-how is this going to effect on our businesses
Proctor: study will show what the traffic flow will be if there is a no-build and then show what the traffic is proposed, block by block, during construction
-there has been no study before, we are doing the best we can
Cheslar: will there be other studies?
Proctor:there is no current methodology existing off the shelf that we can follow
Cheslar: There studies all over the country that we developers use regularly
Proctor: Yes there is if you are involved in office building

Gloria Ferris, Old Brooklyn
-Comment about calling this "The Trench"
-happy to see Proctor addressed the visual aspect of this
-what gaurantee do we have that design/aesthetics will be done
Brown: The city will gaurantee that it will be addressed
-an aesthetic committee is being assembled to follow up on these issues
Ferris: what about the cost
Proctor: many of hte things will be done anyway, the cost to make them visually pleasing cost very little
-federal enhancemnet funds
-encourage NOACA to take part in these discussions

Robert Bostwick, architech
(missed the question)
something about the retaining walls
Proctor: we will share the cost in any widening/retaining wall issues
Bostwick: A sincere proposal will show that you are interested in the trees as well as the sidewalk
Proctor: are you aware of the Shoreway Project? blah, blah... ODOT has provided most of the funding for this and other local projects that do not make the freeway any better, show that we are offering goodwill, blah,blah
Bostwick: what can be done to the innerbelt to not only enhance safety, but help the local economy
-we should take Havilands suggestion to take a 60 day break to study this
-there other solutions that we have not thouhgt about yet
Applause

John (?), Blonderhome(?)
local business owner
-his employees use the innerbelt
how is the new setup going to save time for people from our location, 40th and propect
Craig: the savings are on overall trip
-there may be some waiting at traffic lights, but the overall savings from the innerbelt travel to local businesses will be decreased
John: I am suspicious of you numbers

Phil Pavarini, Tremont West Board Member
When will there be a meeting so the citizens can attend - evening
Brown: some of our most effective meetings have been in the neighborhoods, not the big ones like this
Craig: concurred, we will continue to listen
-FHWA will continue to listen
-we will have some more evening meetings

11:15

Jim Volk, Cleveland Indians
-appreciates this type of gathering and the local CDC efforts
-for the most part this is a good plan
-i would really like to take another look at 90... 40,00 fans, plus Quicken and theaters...
i think the current plan, although an improvemnet, is still flawed
-homeland security issues, do not see how this plan addresses this

Joe Cimperman, Coucilman
there has been six years of study plus w6 weeks of economic study, surprised to hear that this was your first
-when will it be done?
-who is going to pay for the maintainance of the marginal roads
-we ask that ODOT address that
-agrees with the 60 day cooling off period
-is there a concensus about this
-the conty may have some input about JUVY
Proctor: it is a given that we will do the 60 days... and up until the end of the year
- we have not maintained roads like this in the past, but will discuss with the city

Mark Leonard, Dodd Camera
-there needs to be an additional way to exit the freeway in case an exit is missed, otherwise you will end up on the other side of the river
-Juvy, questions the historic relevance of the building
Brown: it is not he use of the historic building, it is the architectual significance

Tom, Gateway
Discussed some historic issues with other buildings and preservation issues that have come up

Chris Bongorno, Planning Student
-concerned about the streetlevel traffic
-concerned about the possible 30 plus buildings that will be taken
---Artcraft
-these taking will hurt the image of the city
Brown: the city agrees that we have to do everything possible to make sure these building are saved
St. Clair/Superior: have asked ODOT to relook at some of the allignments issues with some of the buildings
Craig: We looked at takes conservatively
-there are some that we may not need
-some of the impact will only involve some of the parking lots associated with building

Frank Porter, Central Cadillac
-Greatful he has been involved with all discussions
-after spending all of the money we spent on remodeling... it will be more difficult for customers to reach us.
-compared this proposed closing to closing harvard/271 exits and trying to get to brainard
-to the representative from FHWA, is there rome for compromise
FHWA: (did not know he was here)
-this is the type of thinking we like to see... discussion
-is everyone going to get what they want, no
-in the end, this will be the most balanced
-there is room for compromise
-we cannot let special interest keep us from oour objectives: safety, access and congestion
-there is room for compromise, but we cannot promise Carnegie will remain open
Proctor: if we could keep these two exits open, we would. but the traffic studies and animation shows that traffic stops on the freeway when either one of these exits remain open
-the physics of it will not work
Jim Haviland:
-on the issue of compromise, we have proposed a a different configuration that would take Juvy , but allow for a better configuration
Proctor:
-we feel legally handtied by federal caselaw, if there is an alternative where there is no taking, then we have to follow through on that precident
-we are bound legally

Steve Qua, Limo Business
-it is not an issue of the amount of time it takes to get from a to b, it is the perception
-are those ramp reductions going to address this
-economic study question: will this allow for your business to grow?
-that question does not exist
-Can you organically grow, if the customer perceives that there is an negative change

Bill Beckenbach, Quadrangle
-concerned with the truck traffic as it effects tri-c, post office and hospital

John Cleff, Cleveland Clinic
-we are responsible for as much of the congestion as anybody
-it is important that we maintain a front door and a back door to our facility
-Euclid Corridor will reduce some of that access
-we are only to continue to grow, this must be realized

Ed Hauser
-back to public process
-i am looking for answers
-i take the lack of answers as an insult personally
-there is a 14 step public process that has been broken
FHWA: the person you need to reach is Kappka in DC
-I am aware of your concerns
-we are trying to address your concerns
-you asked about the documentation, we are addressing it
-the decisions are not final until we have finished going through the process
-the January deadline will be extended (wow)
-please do not feel like you are being ignored

Hauser:
-the bridge has been decided on and that is the part that has been decided on.
FHWA: that desicion has not been finalized (wow, again)

Terry , Business Owner
(missed question)
something about timeframe for property aquisition
Craig:
case by case until

Bob Brown:
Than you and good bye


(Comments anyone?)

Cleveland Planning Commission Report – Friday, February 3, 2006

Better late then never, right? I thought last semester was intense, whew… I have lot of reading to do. Anyway…

Call to order – 9:06 AM

Roll Call –

Present:
Bob Brown
Tony Coyne
Joe Cimperman
Lillian Kuri
Gloria Jean Pinkney

Absent:
David Bowen
Larry Lumpkin
Rev. S. Small

Mandatory Referrals (All approved)

1. Ordinance #2210-05: City property on 5158 Broadway Avenue sold to Dr. Javier Lopez. Dr. Lopez says he will occupy 50% of the property and lease the other portion out. He also has plans for a second phase.
2. Ordinance #119-06: The sale of Land Reutilization Program property located on Cedar Avenue, between East 100^th and 101^st Streets to Fairfax Renaissance Development Corporation. This land is for the Star Research Building that was conceptually approved by the commission last December. It was noted the Cleveland Clinic is still not on board with the developer; however, they said they do not need the Clinic in order to move forward. Good news.
3. Ordinance #161-06: Amend a previously passed ordinance passed on October 31, 2005 regarding building height requirements within the Midtown Mixed Use District.
   

Summary Calendar (All approved)

1. Ordinance #115-06: Authorized the sale of Land Reutilization Program property on East 68^th Street to Juanmea Charnuse Harris.
2. Ordinance #116-06: Authorized the sale of Land Reutilization Program property on Whittier Avenue to Angela Bennett.
3. Ordinance #118-06: Authorized the sale of Land Reutilization Program property on St. Clair Avenue to Ronda J. Thompson.
4. Ordinance #22-06: To vacate a portion of Alum Court
5. Ordinance #17-06: To vacate a portion of the 1^st un-named Alley, west of Pearl Road from Krather Road to its northern terminus.
   

Lot Split (Ward 12)
7732 Spafford Road

What should have been a routine approval was dragged on for nearly an hour. I am not going to get all of this correct, but I will try. The property either currently has or is proposed to have four units on it: three single-family and one multi-family – none of which would be owner occupied. Partly because of this and with issues regarding the legality of the current driveway ribbon (in addition to the lack of support from the local councilman) the commission did not approve the lot split.
It was suggested the owner, who was not present, might consider tearing one of the houses down and place (legal) driveway with a nice garage and carriage house in its place.

Quote of the day – Tony Coyne:

“Never let the market dictate a good planning decision.”

Buckeye Road Design Review, BR 2006-01

2780 East 116^th Street, Gas Station, Hanini Sub and Corned Beef – Demolition and Reconstruction

This should have also been a relatively simple approval; however, the owner of the proposed gas station did not take well to the local development corp. committee’s comments about the project and instead of coming back to them with improvements, they went straight to the commission (with said improvements… or at least some of the).

What is planned is to tear down the existing structure and have it replaced with a new one. What was an issue had to do with landscaping and certain design elements (the business is located near Shaker Square and Metro Hospital), both of which were addressed.

In the end, the commission approved the plan with a condition that the existing guardrail along an adjacent side street is taken down and in its place, a decorative black aluminum fence along the entire street edge.

Mt. Pleasant BRD, Confirmation (approved)
Chandra Williams

Midtown Design Review, M2006-001 (approved)
BRD, Ward 7

4600 Euclid Avenue, New construction of 3-story office building & parking garage renovation, seeking full approval

Paul Volpe of City Architecture gave this presentation. Remember the multi-alarm fire at this location last April? (photo by Mike Whitiker, Firehouse.com) Well, a design has been submitted for a new office building to be built in that location. If you cannot picture the location, it is next to the Agora and across the street from the RTA Garage. Attempts to post the rendering were unfruitful. It will be a very nice addition to the street and will fit in well with the Euclid Corridor.

Design Review, DRC 06-004, (approved)

Wards 17 and 14
Stockyard Homes, LP., Lease Purchase Properties, Scattered Site Single-Family Houses

18 units of housing to be built on empty lots throughout the Stockyards Neighborhood. Three differmet models will be available.

Director’s Report (none)

Ed Hauser

At the January 6 Planning Commission meeting, Ed Hauser was cut short at the end of the meeting (regarding the Innerbelt Project) due to a previously scheduled flu shot event being held in the same room. Tony Coyne told Ed he could come back at another time to address the commission.

Today was his day. What follows are some of the comments made by some of the Commission members during this time.

Cimperman -
*Paul Alsenas brought the bridge alignment issue to the public’s attention.
*ODOT recently was part of a meeting with numerous politicians (not Paul Alsenas) and all came intoconsensus regarding the dropping of the southern alignment
*The Economic Development study still has not been done
*Perhaps we should invite Paul Alsenas to help with the economic development portion
*Mayor Jackson wants all trench issues resolved before he endorses the alignment
*Avon Commons, Rockside and Chagrin Highlands would not exist without the current rampage system in place.

Coyne –
*He disagreed with Cimperman stating the creation of these places were circumstantial

Cimperman –
*ODOT Director Proctor told Mayor Jackson, “I just don’t understand the people of Cleveland.” *Cimperman then stated (to commission) He’s right, he does not understand us.
*All this time ODOT had been asking for us to compromise on very aspects of the freeway design repeatedly. We have been compromising for 5 ½ years.
*There are some major problems ahead with this project. Attention has been brought to the consultants and ODOT regarding the failing bulkheads on the Cuyahoga River – they never thought about it; Homeland Security – they never thought about that either.

Kuri –
*There was a 50 person scoping committee with no one person or agency being held accountable

Cimperman –
*The scoping Committee was designed to fail
*In June of 2004, ODOT said they would include community development with the project. *Sometime between then and June of 2005, something happened where they decided not to address it.
*There is a political feeling that we (Cleveland) will be ok with whatever is done with the trench because of the all of the work that was accomplished with the West Shoreway
*“You think they (ODOT) doesn’t get it… I think they do get it and are purposely avoiding it.”

St. Clair-Superior Dog Update

Some people asked me for more details on the dog art for the St. Clair - Superior neighborhood.
Here is some information from Katharyne Marcus, Commercial Development Manager for the local development corporation.

The white things with the bubble wrap on them are fiberglass dog sculptures that will be placed on steel boxes (making them 5 feet 5 inches tall) and scattered throughout the St. Clair Superior neighborhood.

This is a three fold project funded in part by the Cuyahoga County Commissioners:

1. Public art (local artists are implementing their own unique designs using the dog as their canvas),

2. Cultural awareness (2006 is the Chinese New Year - Year of the Dog) a,

3. Economic development (we anticipate that this project will bring in new customers to support our local businesses).

Each dog will be sponsored by a business or individual and on display from May through September. In October, the dogs will be up for auction. The proceeds from the auction will be seed money for next year - Year of the Boar.

Know anyone who would want to sponsor a dog? Tell them to call me at 881-0644.

Katharyne Marcus

The Cleveland Colectivo Considers Community Grant Requests

Clevelanders coming together to strengthen our community through collective investments that identify and nurture innovative projects.

Last Wednesday, a group of area residents that make up the Cleveland Colectivo, began to sift through nearly 50 requests for funding. (Pictures from the meeting.) These request ranged from environmental to arts to community building. At this meeting, the Colectivo cut the selection to 12 finalist and over the next week or so they will pick the final selections and the amount they will be awarded. Good luck to everyone.

What is the Cleveland Colectivo, you ask. The words from the website are much better then what I could come up with, so:

In the fall of 2004 a small circle of people decided it was time to stop talking about Cleveland’s problems and start investing in solutions. They gathered together friends and neighbors to begin building a new giving circle and The Cleveland Colectivo was born. Inspired by the traditional practice of immigrant neighbors who invested in each other’s businesses in order to build community, the Cleveland Colectivo is a group of like-minded friends, neighbors, and colleagues who have joined together for the purpose of collective giving.

If you want more information, or would like to join, visit the site - here.


Now for something completely different, these nearly life-size, bubble wrapped dogs will soon be the throughout the St. Clair - Superior Neighborhood sporting, I imagine, some funky colors. They will be given to local artists to paint, or whatever, and placed in various places in the neighborhood in recognition of, in part, the Chinese Lunar New Year which happens to be the Year of the Dog.



Finally, my post will be slowing down somewhat over the next three months due to heavy reading this semester in school. I will still post the happenings of the Planning Commission after their meetings - so stay tuned.

No Planning Commission Report Today

The little ones are home from school today and they get bored easily when I take them to a meeting. Hell, even I get bored.
Instead, I want to bring you up to speed on the workings of the Commission; that is, what is their mandate and how much control do they really have. I would like to eventually fill everyone in on who the members are, what do they do in real life, how long have they been on the commission and other bits of useful information I think everyone should know. This will be an ongoing project, so here is the first part.
The Planning Commission's website states on their on home page:

The City Planning Commission, established in 1915 (as the "City Plan Commission"), is a body of seven members, six are appointed by the Mayor and one is a member of City Council. The Commission is supported by a staff of professional planners and architects. The City Charter gives the Commission responsibility for preparing plans to guide "development and improvement" of the City and its neighborhoods, and for reviewing all legislation and other matters that concern the "use or development of land.”

Chapter 11 of the City Charter

§ 76 City Planning Commission

There shall be a City Planning Commission composed of seven (7) members. One shall be a member of the Council of the City of Cleveland chosen by each Council to serve during the term of such Council, and six members shall be appointed by the Mayor, with the approval of Council, and may be removed by him. The term of the members, other than Council members, shall be six (6) years, except that of the initial appointments, the terms of two members shall be two (2) years, and the terms of two members shall be four (4) years. Vacancies in the Commission shall be filled in the same manner for the unexpired term. The Chairman of the Commission shall be appointed annually by the Mayor from the members and may be removed as Chairman at his pleasure.
(Effective November 21, 1967)

§ 76-1 Directors and Staff

There shall be a Planning Director who shall be nominated by the Commission and appointed by the Mayor at his discretion. He shall be ex-officio Secretary of the City Planning Commission and shall serve until removed by the Mayor with the concurrence of a majority of the Commission. Upon nomination of the Planning Director the Commission shall appoint as its staff such technical and office personnel and assistants as it may deem necessary within the appropriation made available for such purpose. All such appointments, except the Planning Director and his secretary, shall be made in conformity with the civil service provisions of this Charter. Under the direction of the Commission the Director shall supervise and control the planning staff.
(Effective November 3, 1942)

§ 76-2 Powers and Duties of Commission

It shall be the function and duty of the Planning Commission to make and adopt a general plan for the development and improvement of the City, and for any area outside of the City which in the judgment of the Commission bears relation to the planning of the City. No general plan or portions thereof or amendments thereto shall be adopted by the Commission until after a public hearing thereon. So much of the general plan as may be established or from time to time amended by ordinance of Council shall constitute the official map of the City of Cleveland. The Commission shall also make plans and proposals for specific improvements and projects which it deems desirable for the City and its surrounding area and recommend them to the appropriate authority. These plans and proposals shall not become a part of the general plan until adopted as such. The Commission shall have authority to call upon officers and employees of other departments and divisions of the City of Cleveland for assistance in City planning. On or before the 1st day of June in each year the Commission shall recommend to the Mayor a capital improvement budget for the following year and a comprehensive five-year capital improvement program. It shall be the duty of the Commission to take the initiative in planning for the City and surrounding area and it shall have full power to publish and distribute at public expense copies of plans or reports and to promote public interest in and understanding of general plans and of other recommendations or proposals. It shall have authority to make such investigations, maps and studies relating to the planning of the community as it may deem desirable. The Planning Commission may recommend to the appropriate public authorities or private agencies programs for the development and improvement of the community, for the enactment of legislation pertaining thereto, for the building of public structures and improvements and for the financing thereof. The Commission may enter into agreement with other governmental or private agencies necessary or desirable for carrying forward any of its purposes subject to the approval of Council.
(Effective November 3, 1942)

The members consist of :

Anthony J. Coyne, Chairman

Attorney, Mansour, Gavin, Gerlack & Manos Tony specializes in municipal planning and zoning law and general litigation. He is a housing and neighborhood activist as well as a board member of the Near West Housing Corporation. He is credited with providing a professional services link to the Ohio City neighborhood group that provides housing for low and moderate-income families. In 1989, Tony served on Mayor Michael White's "Transition '90" team and was subsequently appointed to the Cleveland Planning Commission. Tony's membership in professional and public service organization include the Cleveland Bicentennial Commission Advisory Board, the Citizens League of Greater Cleveland, the Board of Trustees of the Ohio Planning Conference, and the Cleveland Planning Commission. (From Maxine Goodman-Levin College of Urban Affairs)

David H. Bowen

Architect, Richard L. Bowen + Associates

Lillian Kuri

Former Executive Director, Cleveland Public Art

Lawrence A. Lumpkin

Former School Board President, Cleveland Public School District

Gloria Jean Pinkney

City of Cleveland Councilman, Ward 13, Joe Cimperman

Rev. Sam E. Small

Secretery, Robert N. Brown (Current Planning Director)

What You Missed at the Webloggers Meetup on Wednesday

Last night, the Cleveland Webloggers met once again at the Town Fryer on St. Clair Avenue. There are some good events coming up and I learned a few things too.

First, if you are an attention freak and you want people to read what you have to say, just mention Tim Russo's name (we will see what happens).

Next, if you are looking for more attention, then comment about something from The Washington Post, like this article, which brings up the ongoing problem of people believing their cell phone numbers will soon be made available to telemarketers. In case you are one of those people, it is illegal for telemarketers to make unsolicited calls to a cell phone. Somebody at school was just expressing his concern to me over this afternoon. (If you are still worried, go here.)

The big question of the night was when, if ever, Lori was going to post again. Apparently, she has been busy making college student's financial situation worse buy single-handedly raising the cost of textbooks around the world.

Among the 20 or so people there, was Stu Kollar whose new blog, Writeup, may be one of the only admittedly ‘fictional’ blogs around.
From his description:

“Writeup contains some of my fiction, a little of which has been published but most of which has not. It gives me an easy way to offer a look at stuff I've written over the years, including a few short stories and opening chapters of longer pieces. Anyone interested in seeing more can get it by posting an e-mail request.”

Check it out.

Will Kessel asked how many blogs in the sphere are fictional and somebody from the back yelled “All of them!” I think it was Jeff Hess.

Get The Book!

Since my mother doesn’t have a computer, I compiled Politry for 2005 in a chapbook: 2005, a Bad Year Made Verse, – 317 “poems,” mostly about stuff Bush bungled – a chronicle of a crummy year or a great gag gift for a conservative friend. 132 pages, saddle stitched, $9.50, including postage.

Also present were Roger Bundy from Cleveland Equanimous Philosopher, Jack, Gloria and Ken Duncan who was a little taken aback at the prospect of peddling his book, Politry for 2005: A Bad Year Made Verse. You can pick yours up by sending an email to book@politry.com.

Reader, (as opposed to writer) Mary Ellen from the Cleveland Public Library was there and wanted to let everyone know about the possibility of holding a Cleveland Webloggers event in the Eastman Garden during iNGENUiTY this summer – strictly for fertilization purposes, of course.

Wrapping up the attendance were Danielle, George, Peter, Molly, Mary Beth and Pho, who promises to have a joint Akron/Cleveland Webloggers Meetup soon. There were others present, but I either did not actually talk with them, I could not write fast enough or they left before we finally got around to the traditional introductions.

As for the actual meeting portion, Danielle talked about the upcoming Meet the Bloggers Fundraiser at the Pearl of the Orient restaurant next Thursday. You can read more about this here… or at Plugged In Cleveland. If you are not sure whether or not you want to go this event, word has it George will have on his kilt… something about not having a female to assist him like the other celebrity bartenders. The discussion then went into how to expand the Meet the Bloggers concept to individuals who touch the lives of ordinary people.

Overall, it was a very good meeting; however, that is subjective since this was the first time I came to a meeting from the beginning instead of showing up at the end. If I missed some of the details, tough. At least I stayed sober enough to take some notes

A Comment on Urban Ohio's Forum: "Building 'Pesht' - Cleveland Megaproject"

As mentioned on the Cuyahoga County Weblog, Ken Prendergast has just completed his three part series on developer Bob Stark's vision for downtown Cleveland in the Sun News.

From the County Weblog
The West Side Sun News concludes its three-part series on developer Robert Stark's downtown Cleveland plans with a look at ideas for accelerating the Port Authority's proposed relocation across the Cuyahoga River from the 50 year concept in the City's Lakefront Plan.

If you have not read the articles, do it now. Or, go to the forum instead. You can get some good backround information provided by Ken as well as some interesting opinions by many others. Currently, there is a discussion on what the new neighborhood north of the Warehouse District should be called. What would you call it?

Cleveland's Own Modern Day Ghost Town

As I previously reported , the movers are busy removing the last of the residents out of the Jefferson Neighborhood so they can start on demolition later this month for the Ryser Properties shopping center. I drove around yesterday to take pictures of the current condidtions. What follows are three out of the twenty five I took.
If you would like to see the whole set, including the original color shots, go here.

Cleveland Planning Commision Report - Friday, January 6, 2006

This sucks, I had to completely retype this post because I am an idiot.

I wish I had thought of this sooner – for now on, when reporting the happenings from the Planning Commission Meeting, I will include a rooster of attendees. After attending these meetings for the better part of three years, I have noticed there are many times when certain members are not there; that is, there are at least two members who are rarely there. Seeing as this is a compensated position, which includes parking, you would think that most of the members would be there a majority of the time. I have a problem with this. At a later posting, after doing some research, I will describe the details of how a member is appointed and what the expectations are to be of them, as well as there compensation.
On with the meeting

Mandatory Referrals (All Approved)

1. An amendment to a previously passed ordinance regarding zoning of parcels on the west side of West 117th Street between Western Avenue and I-90
2. Issuing a permit to allow Medical Mutual to install planter boxes, Planting beds and other streetscape obstructions
3. Allowing Green Energy Ohio to lease space on the Kirtland Intake Crib for the purpose of conducting a wind study and maintaining a wind-monitoring tower for a two-year period. The city of Cleveland will receive the equipment after the two year study
4. Determining the construction and installation of manually controlled pumps and equipment at the Nottingham Plant
5. Authorizing the sale of property from the Land Reutilization Program to the Cleveland Public School District at East 146th and 147th Streets
6. Demolition of the Trinity Building at 9203 Detroit Avenue, including asbestos abatement and remediation of the soil and groundwater at the site (This will the first major addition to the city’s Industrial Landbank Program in almost a year).
7. [Added to the agenda] Rename a portion of Erieside Street behind the Great Lakes Science Center to Mather Way (pictured - lower half of image, source Google.)
   

Summary Calendar (all approved)

1. Authorizing the sale of property on Marvin Avenue to Civic Builders as part of the Land Reutilization Program
2. Authorizing the sale of city-owned property in Wade Park on East Boulevard to the United States Department of Veteran Affairs
3. An addendum to a previously passed ordinance relating to the reconstruction of Jennings road (which, incidentally, began today)
4. An amendment to a previously passed ordinance relating to the widening of West 150th street between Industrial Parkway and Brookpark Road
5. Vacate a portion of Holmden Road (this will be used as a staging area for construction of Steel Yard Commons and Quigley Road)
   

Design Review

1. Ohio & Erie Canal Signage Program, Conceptual Review – The signs (conceptual renderings pictured) designed by Cloud Gehshan Associates, will replace the fading signs that currently exist throughout the corridor. The Ohio & Erie National Canalway name will be changed to the Ohio & Erie Canalway. This falls within new guidelines created by the Feds who are changing all references to “Scenic Byway” to America’s Byway.” Apparently, many travelers are confused by the ‘scenic’ designation when driving through urban areas like the area near the Main Post Office. This was approved with a recommendation to add the website address to the bottom of the signs.
2. Demolition and Parking Lot Design of the former Saint John’s Dormitory (1964) at 1100 Rockwell Avenue
   

Special Presentation – Little Italy Master Plan
The PD article by Tom Breckenridge does a much better job then I ever could describing the nuances of the plan. The Little Italy Master Plan, although not the first neighborhood plan to be brought before the commission, is diffidently the most comprehensive neighborhood plan ever brought to the board for approval. The plan was approved with the highest of commendation.

Directors Report
Director Bob Brown happily stated that he was sworn in as Mayor Jackson’ Director of the Planning Commission Monday, January 2.
He mentioned there was a good possibility that the planning functions of the city’s Neighborhood Development Department may be merged with the Planning Commission. A move I am surprised has not happened sooner.
Mentioned that ODOT’s perceived gesture of goodwill by having national experts look at the southern alignment option of the Innerbelt Plan was not as it seemed. Apparently, these experts would have had to make a recommendation on the plan anyway. Regardless, I hope they give it a fair look.

Nearly $18 Million Spent on Avoiding Eminent Domain for Ryser Project

File under public disclosure.

My wife likes to read the real estate section of the PD on Saturdays. This way she can keep up on housing values in the neighborhood. In this past Saturday's issue, she noticed something peculiar – dozens of house all on the same street had been transferred from one property owner to another. Then she noticed it was ore then one street – in fact, there were five streets with no less then 65 properties listed. (Over 100 properties were purchased.)

The total amount paid for the properties listed is around $12,875,882. In total, Ryser Properties is said to have paid almost $18 million for all of the properties. This was done with help of a loan of $6 million from the city, which Target will pay back to the city with taxes generated.

I figured out right away the listings being shown were the parcels being used for the new Ryser Properties shopping center featuring a Giant Eagle and Target store on West 117th Street, north of I-90. I’ve driven around this neighborhood a few times over the past couple of months. It is very strange seeing all of the houses boarded up throughout the area - a modern day ghost town, if you will. Most of the tenants are to be moved out by the end of this month and demolition is to begin right away. Target plans to be opened by October of this year (2006). (There is no mention of this project on Ryser's website.)

From the listing in the paper and with help from county auditor information, it appears Target has paid the most for a piece of property. That would be the parcel located 11826 Elmwood Avenue that was purchased for $2,119,022. Not bad for a 5,000 sq ft property that sold for $33,000 in 1983. That’s over $423 a square foot.

The top five are listed as follows:

11826 Elmwood Avenue - $2,119,022;
3105 West 121^st Street - $1,000,000;
11916 Elmwood Avenue – $400,000;
11839 Sector Avenue - $305,000; and
11933 Sector Avenue - $225,000.

The bottom five include:

12024 Sector Avenue - $35,000;
11810 Belmont Avenue - $45,000;
12012 Sector Avenue - $55,000;
12004 Sector Avenue - $80,000; and
3106 West 120^th street - $80,000.

Keep in mind, the developers paid an additional 30% over market value to the owners so there would not be any use of eminent domain. Just goes to show, everyone has their price – some more then others... and some les.

Happy New Year

Finally...

Just finished the new blog settings. I like this set-up much better. I felt cramped with the previous one. Any comments or suggestions?

More Innerbelt Bridge News

Last weeks PLanning Commision meeting needed to be over at noon in order to make room for flu shot distribution. So there was one person who wanted to speak that was never heard. That person was Ed Hauser. He did speak with Chairman Tony Coyne for a little bit afterwords, but I am not sure to what extent. It is this reason that I am republishing his statement and handout that should have been part of the public record, but probably was not included.

From NeoBridge.net:

Preliminary Assessment Findings - Request for ODOT to Reconsider the Cleveland Innerbelt Bridge Alternative for the Southern Bridge Alignment

December 21, 2005
To: Gordon Proctor
Director, Ohio Department of Transportation
1980 W. Broad Street
Columbus, OH 43223


From: Ed Hauser
11125 Lake Avenue #402
Cleveland, OH 44102

Distribution List:

Interested Citizens, Organizations, Public Officials, and the Media
U.S. Senators: George Voinovich, Mike DeWine
U.S. Representatives: Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Dennis Kucinich
FHWA Ohio Office: Herman Rodrigo, Director-Program Development; Dennis Decker, Division Administrator;
 Victoria Peters, Director- Office of Engineering & Operations
Governor of Ohio- Robert Taft
Ohio Senators: Representing Greater Cleveland Districts
Ohio Representatives: Representing Greater Cleveland Districts
ODOT District 12: David Coyle, Deputy Director; Craig Hebebrand, Innerbelt Plan Project Manager
Ohio Lake Erie Commission: Members
Ohio Historic Preservation Office- Franco Ruffini, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Cuyahoga County Commissioners: Tim Hagan, President; Jimmy Dimora, Peter Lawson Jones
Cuyahoga County Planning Commission: Members
Mayor of Cleveland- Jane Campbell
Mayor Elect of Cleveland- Frank Jackson
Cleveland City Council: Members
Cleveland City Planning Commission: Members

Dear Director Proctor:

As a citizen, I have participated in ODOT's Cleveland Innerbelt Plan from the first meeting in 2001 through last week's meeting at the Cleveland City Planning Commission. I will share my findings in this preliminary assessment that focuses on the Innerbelt Bridge Alternatives. The overall finding is that ODOT must reconsider the Southern Bridge Alignment Alternative for the reasons brought forth below. At this time, there is insufficient information available to the public and inadequate explanations why the Southern Bridge Alignment Alternative was removed from further consideration.

Please respond to this request in five business days and add this preliminary assessment request to the public record under "public comments." I will submit a separate public records request (FOIA) to ODOT's public information officer regarding the public records for the Cleveland Innerbelt Bridge Alternatives.

Overview of Findings

The county planning commission submitted an alternative plan for a southern bridge alignment in March 2003 that was removed from further consideration by ODOT in June 2005. The only reason the South Bridge plan was removed can be found in the minutes of the Urban Core Projects Advisory Committee on June 9, 2005- “Paul Dorothy added that the Southern Alignment for the bridge has been removed from further consideration because it would require taking the Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation on the south end of the bridge.”

However, it seems that there was an alternative that wouldn't take the church, as mentioned in those minutes, “Paul Alsenas said at the last Committee meeting, a Southern Alternative was shown that allowed the church to remain.” Also, during the last three public meetings, ODOT acknowledged that the Southern Bridge plan is “feasible.”

The question remains- Why was the South Bridge plan removed from further consideration? ODOT still has to provide us a timely and logical answer to that question, before choosing the final bridge alignment. Without a clear answer to that question, public records need to be inspected to find the answer.

ODOT is Proceeding Without Full Consideration of All Public Comments Being Gathered

Up to now, there has been an overwhelming public response for ODOT to reconsider southern bridge alignment plan. It seems that public input does not enter into the equation when ODOT decides how a half-billion dollars of our tax money is spent for the new Innerbelt Bridge. ODOT stated that they will not reconsider the southern bridge alignment although they admit the plan is feasible.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't ODOT using public money for both the Innerbelt Bridge project and for their salaries? Why did ODOT hire consultants to design a half-billion dollar bridge that does not have public consensus? As the old saying goes, “don't bite the hand that feeds you,” meaning that public servants work for the public and must listen to what we tell them! At this time ODOT has no intention to reconsider the Southern Bridge Alignment Plan.

ODOT has already selected the bridge design team for its “recommended” northern bridge alignment plan. That means the taxpayers are paying a bridge design team without ODOT addressing the public comments from the last round of public meetings and the comments that will be submitted through the end of January. The main question here is- Will ODOT will correct its official Transportation Development Process? If ODOT corrects its process, the best alternative for the bridge alignment will emerge.

Top Ten Reasons Why ODOT Must Reconsider the Southern Bridge Alignment Plan:

10. ODOT's removal of the South Bridge plan is invalid because Greek Orthodox Church can remain. ODOT must clearly explain why the Southern Bridge Alignment Alternative was removed from further consideration, after acknowledging that the plan is feasible.

9.Public comments gathered so far, support the South Bridge plan. Public comments submitted to ODOT for the Innerbelt Plan must be posted on its website.

8.ODOT has hired the bridge designers prior to compiling and addressing all public comments gathered through the deadline in January.

7.U.S. Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Planning Commission and most importantly the public supports an independent review for the South Bridge plan.

6.No cost analysis for the South Bridge span, which is hundreds of feet shorter than the North Bridge. The only cost analysis has been for the North Bridge alignments.

5.No economic impact study for the North or South Bridge plans. Economic Impact Studies for both the Northern and Southern Bridge Alignment Alternatives must be completed and assessed prior to the final decision of the alignment. There are differences between the Northern and Southern Bridge Alignments regarding the amount and location of prime land that would be opened up.

4.No engineering analysis for the South Bridge plan. There are differences between the Northern and Southern Bridge Alignments in the approaches to the Central Interchange and the ramp closures.

3.The Historic Preservation Act requires that all alternatives be examined prior to demolishing a structures or property eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. ODOT's “Recommended Preferred Alternative” for the North Bridge takes property eligible for the NRHP. The Innerbelt Bridge is also within the boundary of the Ohio Coastal Management Program, therefore the bridge development must be consistent with OCMP policies.

2.Step 6 (current step) of ODOT's Transportation Development Process states “The decision to carry forward more than one alternative is permissible. If more than one alternative is reasonable and there are no major difference in the level of potential impacts among the alternative, then all of those alternatives should be carried forward through the evaluations in this step."

1.ODOT must Reconsider the South Bridge Plan to cultivate public trust and confidence in ODOT. The implementation of ODOT's "Transportation Development Process" is flawed and needs to be corrected immediately, to fulfill its requirement for a "balanced consideration of alternatives and impacts." It is clear, for the reasons stated above, that certain requirements and obligations in ODOT's official process have not been met.

Conclusion

Step 6 is very critical in the determination of what bridge alignment we will have live with for the next 50-100 years. It will also have a tremendous impact on the economic development opportunities and attractiveness of our great community.

At this time, ODOT is recommending that we proceed with its preferred alternative that will repair the existing Innerbelt bridge for eastbound traffic and build a new bridge to the north. ODOT's Recommended Preferred Alternative has many flaws associated with it and there is an urgent need for the Southern Bridge Alignment Alternative to “be carried forward through the evaluations in this step.”

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________________
Ed Hauser

Great use of a parking Space

Heidi, urban affairs student from Kansas City, found this post of what do with a metered parking space. I'll go one step further and say this would be a good idea for the spaces in front of fire hydrants. I, for one, am sick of seeing vehicles (usually 'official' vehicles) parked in these spaces.
Do you have an idea for a parking space? This may be usefull for next year's iNGENUiTY.

from the "i love this so much" files

Via Pednet, a great idea for putting parking meters to good use: turn the parking spots into parks!

Feeding the meter of a parking space enables one to rent precious downtown real estate, typically on a 1/2 hour to 2 hour basis. What is the range of possible occupancy activities for this short-term lease?

PARK(ing) is an investigation into reprogramming a typical unit of private vehicular space by leasing a metered parking spot for public recreational activity.

We identified a site in an area of downtown San Francisco that is underserved by public outdoor space and is in an ideal, sunny location between the hours of noon and 2 p.m. There we installed a small, temporary public park that provided nature, seating, and shade.

Our goal was to transform a parking spot into a PARK(ing) space, thereby temporarily expanding the public realm and improving the quality of urban human habitat, at least until the meter ran out.

The comments on BLDGBLOG provided even more suggestions for the rented spaces, but my favorite was: "Two or three consecutive spots and you could go bowling."

City Councilman Unearths Magical Zoning Amulet

I love this. Actually my wife found it and sent it to me. It is from August; I am surprised I have not seen it before.

From The Onion:

City Councilman Unearths Magical Zoning Amulet

August 24, 2005 | Issue 41•34

ROCHESTER, NY—After years spent poring over mysterious and arcane plat sheets and deciphering long-forgotten building codes, city councilmember Mike LaMere unearthed the mysterious City Zoning Amulet Friday.

Mike LaMere, wearing the Ever-Evaluating Eye of Surr-Vey.

"Behold!" LaMere said, holding aloft the solid-gold amulet, which is emblazoned with the Ever-Evaluating Eye of Surr-Vey, Lord Of Demarcation, He Who Measures And Assesses. "With this sigil, the power of zoning comes. Through me, the power of zoning flows! All will behold my power, and I shall bow to no man when designating matter-of-right developments for major retail and office spaces to a maximum lot occupancy of 75 percent for residential use!"

LaMere held the glowing amulet aloft and transmuted a neighborhood of low-income apartments into a semi-wooded, single-family, residential district with an adjoining riverside park.

Though the amulet had long been dismissed as urban legend, a mythical ideal of zoning perfection handed down from city planner to city planner, LaMere became convinced that not only was it real, but that it had been used to lay out the cities of Ur, Atlantis, and Inver Grove Heights, MN.

LaMere credited the amulet with the overnight renovation of the Monroe County Public Library, and the recent redesignation of a Southern Rochester area from "commercial" to "single-family residential use for detached and semi-detached structures." Many Rochester citizens believe the amulet is responsible for the fully stocked ocean aquarium that materialized in the city center Sunday, and the gleaming new Friendly's restaurant that rose serenely over the banks of the Genesee River late Monday afternoon.

Although the Rochester City Zoning Board controls all decisions related to city planning, sources at City Hall say that, as long as LaMere's powerful zoning wizardry is performed for the good of the city, they "see no reason to deny him what seems to be his destiny."

LaMere unleashes the Eye of Surr-Vey's power, violently rezoning a residential area into a landfill.

"Two weeks ago, the biggest news in Rochester was our huge public garage sale," said William A. Johnson, Rochester's mayor. "Our city center was still a moribund tax burden with small businesses in big buildings and families moving to the suburbs in droves. Now, with a wave of his mighty amulet, Councilman LaMere can designate matter-of-right medium-density development, with limited offices for non-profit organizations, trade associations, and professionals permitted as a special exception requiring approval of the RCZA."

Despite the potential improvements to Rochester's civic landscape, some residents remain wary of LaMere's apparent bureaucratic invincibility.

"It's wonderful that someone's finally doing something to revitalize this town, even if it is someone who can commune with church gargoyles," said local baker Wendy Kittner, whose business was mystically placed on the National Register Of Historic Places last week despite being housed in a building erected in 1981. "He frightens me, and my concern is that if I defy him, I may be turned to stone."

City planning commissioner Errol Criclow, who was dismissed by LaMere at a Planning And Zoning Commission hearing last Thursday as "subhuman," said that he feared that LaMere's power would eventually corrupt him and his city. According to Criclow, during a private consultation with local community leaders, LaMere became infuriated with timid suggestions that his amulet be used to create more green spaces. In a blinding torrent of thunder and light, LaMere violently rezoned Rochester's west side with a maze of warehouses and parking garages. The act left LaMere himself dazed and shaken.

"For a minute there, he seemed his old self," said Criclow. "When he saw what he'd done, he looked remorseful. But then his hand found the amulet, and he threw back his head and laughed long and loud, like a man who has forgotten the difference between industrial and recreational—between right and wrong."

Added Criclow: "I don't think what he's doing is mere magic. I think it's darkest bureaucromancy."

Opportunity Cost, or Opportunity Lost

Opportunity Cost (from Wikipedia): the cost of something in terms of an opportunity foregone (and the benefits that could be received from that opportunity), or the most valuable foregone alternative.

No, the birthday was not so crazy that I just recovered. I just needed to take a break from thinking for a little while.

I have something to help fill this space – I am going to start publishing the generalities of what the City Planning Commission has adopted or not adopted. You would think this would be made more public by those who profess to “Believe”; however, I only see the really big things that occasionally appear in local papers by the likes of Breckenridge, Gill and Prendergast. I know there a few others, but that is not the point. There should be news on all of the happenings in the city in regards to what is being developed. (This applies to decisions made by the County Planning Commission as well.) This first attempt of reporting will not be a very detailed one since I really did not decide to start doing this until two days ago and I do not have sufficient notes.

Moving on (in order) –
Zoning:

There were four zoning changes made. The most significant (by significant, I mean the one that will affect people the most) was the creation of the Clark Metro Business Revitalization District. The district encompasses West 25^th Street from I-71 to I-90 and Clark Avenue from Fulton Road to Scranton Avenue. This is a good move by the CDC of the densest places in the city. They will be able to create positive sense of place along this corridor as soon as they do something with the adult establishments near the heart of the district. APPROVED

Design Review:

Park Lane Villa Rehabilitation
This is a vacant building in University Circle and next to the beautiful Judson Manor. Previously this was an apartment building that was eventually converted to over 150 units of senior housing; most of the apartments were efficiency type spaces. The rehabilitated building will have 93 modern apartments and a new 8-unit condominium next to it, as well as a parking garage. The building will use historic tax credits for part of its funding and when complete, will be a nice addition to the area. APPROVED

Star Research Building (conceptual approval)
This new 5-story building will be located on near East 100^th Street and Cedar Avenue. This will be the first new construction on the south side of Cedar in many years. The proposed research center will not be a project of the Cleveland Clinic but may be used by some of the Clinic’s researchers. The building is being designed by Westlake, Reed & Leskowsky. APPROVED

Innerbelt Bridge Presentation
The Director of the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission, Paul Alsenas, gave a presentation on the Innerbelt Bridge Design and Location Alternatives. I believe anybody who is reading this already knows what is on the table, so I will not bother with what was said by Paul. He did add, however, a new element into to the fold – at least new to me. This new concept was the reworking of University Road in Tremont from the barely two lane-lane road it is now into a fully functional road that would allow better access and great views to and of the Towpath Trail.

I want to report more on the comments that were made by those in attendance.

The affected CDC’s mostly said what has already been reported; here are some additional comments made to the Commission.

From the Quadrangle: They have hired there own traffic consultant to further research the potential access losses; It is time for the city to step and take a stand on the issues raised

From Tremont: Concerned about impact on church, West 14^th street and any potential home loss (ed. obviously, very uninformed).

From Gateway: Access is paramount. They think that having land that is more developable will hurt their neighborhood

Comments from the players to the Commission:

Bob Brown: Reported on a letter from Craig Hebebrand – ODOT is in the process of reviewing constructionability and management of traffic with national experts to see if the southern alignment is feasible.

Debbie Berry: Concerned with potential freeway closures and vehicle access to downtown. Wonders if the ‘new’ developable land that would appear if the southern alignment were chosen will actually have to be used for new ramp placement.

Linda Henrichson: Says that closure to traffic is bad. The ramps to city streets will work out if the southern alignment is chosen. Concerned with bike and pedestrian right of ways.

Comments from the Commission:

Curry: ODOT has not shown what will be gotten by each action it takes. This should be about Strategy in addition to safety.

Tom Breckenridge of the PD was present and reported on a portion of what was said by those present; however, I saw him leave early, so he missed some important comments. Scott Carpenter from the soon-to-be-open Fire Department Museum gave a brief and heartfelt comment against the northern alignment, as did friend John McGovern. As I prepared for my own comment, there was at least two other residents who spoke against the northern alignment.

My comment (paraphrased):

Assuming the engineering for the southern alignment proves feasible, the commission and ODOT must realize there are many residents among us who feel a year of potential awkward traffic management due to a freeway closure is worth the wait.
There are numerous ways to connections to downtown from all directions that will work as a temporary traffic solution, including I-490. This may even help bolster GCRTA ridership. This is not about your inconvenience. Stop thinking about it that way and think about how it will affect our children

Coming Soon

OK, finals are over.
I am now going to work on the template.
Then I will return to a regular posting schedule of sorts.
Happy birthday to me.

Adding some 'weight' to the location of the new convention center

I hate when people take an elevator up one floor. I have always wished elevators could be programmed not to go one floor up (with exception for those with physical disabilities). That being said:
Reading this article in the Wall Street Journal,"New Buildings Help People Fight Flab," got me to thinking about the location of the proposed Cleveland Convention Center. Although this article is actually focused on the design of buildings and their walkability, I started thinking of the convenience, or perceived convenience, of each proposed location.
I have struggled with which location would be the best for said center - they both have their pluses and minuses. The riverfront site would help in expanding the convention season that currently ends in October due to the weather. Come in on a plane, take the train to Tower City, check in at a hotel, eat, go to conference, never worry about the weather. It would also encourage people to stay off the streets. How would the businesses on East Fourth or the Warehouse District feel about that?
The current location is surrounded by a civic space that compares to no other city, there is plenty of room to grow and it is close to most of downtown. The not so good side of it would be being exposed to the elements.
Keeping this article in mind, I am putting my vote in for rebuilding on the current site. Call it Cleveland's part in keeping people in shape. Damn the weather - if it is raining, people can run.
I would rather have people walking around downtown.

Cross Posting Comment - BFD: Forest City News

Comment cross posted on Brewed Fresh Daily:

First, the “Quiet Crisis” comment was tongue in cheek – Sorry if you did not get the joke.

Mr. Morrison, the IX Center is not a convention center; it is an exposition center that caters well for the groups that use it: manufacturing exhibiters, recreation vehicle and boat lovers, late winter/early spring amusement park enthusiasts, etc. The IX center does not cater to the typical convention, or corporate meetings. There are some meeting spaces there, nut not the kind the come to the current downtown center. The IX center does not have the infrastructure to maintain the amount, and size of the conventions, conferences and corporate meetings that currently come downtown. (By infrastructure, I mean hotels, restaurants, retail and convenient transportation options. Of course there is the area around Bagley Road in Middleburgh Heights, but that is neither Cleveland or convenient.)

Regarding operating losses – there is currently only one center in the country that has an operating surplus on a regular basis. That is The Moscone Center in San Francisco. Every relatively new convention center in the country usually runs in the red. They are built/rebuilt knowing this will happen. It is not about making a profit – you might say it is about marketing the city to those who would not normally come for a visit. It also about supporting the economy (service and tourism) the city decided to take on as manufacturing diminished as one of our primary economies. If we do not build or rebuild a new center, we will have abandoned the progress we have made.

You want to provide funds for CSU (I would love it since I am a student there), then go to the state – they are responsible for that; or change the state constitution. You want to provide funds for Tri-C, then support future levies – I do.

I am still skeptical about the FCE series, but I will read it with an open mind. Perhaps businesses like FCE would be more active in the city and region if residents were aware of how they did things – and thus more appreciative (i.e., Progressive, MBNA, Standard Oil, the list goes on). I don’t know.

Disclosure time: I am for rebuilding the convention center.
I see the pros and cons of both sites and will leave it to people who are supposedly smarter then I am to make the decision as to where to build.