generally speaking when cities are dying, maybe they should just bulldoze buildings and plant trees. Has this ever been tried anywhere? Why try to bring the dead back to life? Cleveland has been going downhill since its heydad in the 1920s. It seems like a lot of good money is thrown after bad, especially in all these cities in the rust belt. So what if Independence, Beachwood, or even Lakewood becomes the new "downtown" for the region? Why not let natural things progress? Eventually then these other places will decline and it will be someone else's turn.
Doug
Sprawl Movie, Discussion: How can Lakewood fight sprawl?
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
-
DougHuntingdon
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:29 pm
-
Mark Timieski
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:47 pm
- Location: Lakewood
Urban Sprawl – Public enemy no. 1 for those of us that live in the built city. Sprawl degrades our quality of life by spreading us apart, forcing us to spend increasing amounts of time behind the wheel of a car and by paving the very fields that formerly have fed us. Sprawl dips into our pockets, as the cost of financing the increasing infrastructure (take a look at the ODOT budget) continually skyrockets.
The population in Ohio is not increasing, but new housing starts continue (the last figure I saw was around 40,000 new homes a year in Ohio). While the daily paper may talk about “growth†in outer ring suburbs, more accurately the population is just spreading out. Abandonment is left in sprawls path.
There is a huge economic engine that drives sprawl, I think it’s much like a pyramid scheme. Here’s my logic; does it make sense to you?
The assumption: It costs roughly a certain amount of money per person to provide services such as fire, police, school, trash collection, etc.
Start with an undeveloped suburb. People require services, the empty field does not. Taxes are low compared to developed areas, so property adjacent to the developed become desirable.
As the land is developed the population increases, the demand for services also increase.
Here’s the hook: Newly developed property generates a one-time massive increase in tax income over the undeveloped land. The needs for service lag the increased tax income in developing communities. For a time, taxes can be held down in the “growing†suburb.
Eventually the build out is complete, and either the taxes must increase to meet the required services, or services are reduced to meet the lower tax rates. The suburb now becomes undesirable.
Most of the inner ring suburbs were built after WWII, built around the automobile and inefficient use of space. They are still struggling in many ways to complete initial infrastructure investment (sewers, curbs, sidewalks, and streetlights) while the existing infrastructure is too large to properly maintain. I can only imagine the decline of the “outer ring†suburbs being just that more spectacular.
http://www.cwac.net/landuse/
The population in Ohio is not increasing, but new housing starts continue (the last figure I saw was around 40,000 new homes a year in Ohio). While the daily paper may talk about “growth†in outer ring suburbs, more accurately the population is just spreading out. Abandonment is left in sprawls path.
There is a huge economic engine that drives sprawl, I think it’s much like a pyramid scheme. Here’s my logic; does it make sense to you?
The assumption: It costs roughly a certain amount of money per person to provide services such as fire, police, school, trash collection, etc.
Start with an undeveloped suburb. People require services, the empty field does not. Taxes are low compared to developed areas, so property adjacent to the developed become desirable.
As the land is developed the population increases, the demand for services also increase.
Here’s the hook: Newly developed property generates a one-time massive increase in tax income over the undeveloped land. The needs for service lag the increased tax income in developing communities. For a time, taxes can be held down in the “growing†suburb.
Eventually the build out is complete, and either the taxes must increase to meet the required services, or services are reduced to meet the lower tax rates. The suburb now becomes undesirable.
Most of the inner ring suburbs were built after WWII, built around the automobile and inefficient use of space. They are still struggling in many ways to complete initial infrastructure investment (sewers, curbs, sidewalks, and streetlights) while the existing infrastructure is too large to properly maintain. I can only imagine the decline of the “outer ring†suburbs being just that more spectacular.
http://www.cwac.net/landuse/
-
Donald Farris
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: Lakewood and points beyond
- Contact:
Hi,
I have to take exception to those that feel we live in a built out city. There are plenty of places where they are built out, but Lakewood is not one of them.
We can grow and grow and grow Lakewood. We have a northern border that is limited only by Canada.
We can create all the land we want. We just have to be willing to work for it. We can reclaim land just as the City of Cleveland has done time and time again. Only we can actually use the land we create for high end housing on the water.
The plan presented to City Council to create a peninsula off of Lakewood Park would generate nearly $ 5,000,000 an year for Lakewood and the County and our Schools.
The question is do we want leaders in Lakewood that accept defeat and want to just manage decline or do we want to continue to work to make Lakewood a special place. If people see Lakewood as a City that is managing decline, that is what we will do - decline. People want to be a part of something special. Lakewood has a lot already going for it in that area, but I sense from many that they are still buying that theory being pushed around that our best days are behind us. With a solid tax revenue generator like the peninsula we can freeze tax increase while we grow and let that growth pay for future cost increases. With nearly 150 new high end houses in Lakewood we will be the place people want to come to. Instead of someone moving into a cow field they can move to beautiful lake front property.
We should never think of I90 as a drain to take people out of Lakewood. It is the source daily of thousands of potential new residents. We just need to catch the attention of a few. Show them what their missing. Show them a City that doesn't need tax increases because it is a growing city.
That Time article mentioned eariler said the successful cities will show a "willingness to learn new things." We can not watch from the sidelines. We need to roll up our sleeves and work hard to grow Lakewood. We can do it.
"Newly developed property generates a one-time massive increase in tax income over the undeveloped land. " This is quite true. Let's make some here in Lakewood. We can start with 26 acres of prime housing land on the lake. Once the Lakewood Park Peninsula is done, and it has proven itself as a great source of new revenue, we can build another one either further out on the Lake or elsewhere on our shoreline. Westlake can't do that, nor can Strongsville or even Shaker Heights or Chagrin Falls. They are landlocked cities. We can. But will we?
I have to take exception to those that feel we live in a built out city. There are plenty of places where they are built out, but Lakewood is not one of them.
We can grow and grow and grow Lakewood. We have a northern border that is limited only by Canada.
We can create all the land we want. We just have to be willing to work for it. We can reclaim land just as the City of Cleveland has done time and time again. Only we can actually use the land we create for high end housing on the water.
The plan presented to City Council to create a peninsula off of Lakewood Park would generate nearly $ 5,000,000 an year for Lakewood and the County and our Schools.
The question is do we want leaders in Lakewood that accept defeat and want to just manage decline or do we want to continue to work to make Lakewood a special place. If people see Lakewood as a City that is managing decline, that is what we will do - decline. People want to be a part of something special. Lakewood has a lot already going for it in that area, but I sense from many that they are still buying that theory being pushed around that our best days are behind us. With a solid tax revenue generator like the peninsula we can freeze tax increase while we grow and let that growth pay for future cost increases. With nearly 150 new high end houses in Lakewood we will be the place people want to come to. Instead of someone moving into a cow field they can move to beautiful lake front property.
We should never think of I90 as a drain to take people out of Lakewood. It is the source daily of thousands of potential new residents. We just need to catch the attention of a few. Show them what their missing. Show them a City that doesn't need tax increases because it is a growing city.
That Time article mentioned eariler said the successful cities will show a "willingness to learn new things." We can not watch from the sidelines. We need to roll up our sleeves and work hard to grow Lakewood. We can do it.
"Newly developed property generates a one-time massive increase in tax income over the undeveloped land. " This is quite true. Let's make some here in Lakewood. We can start with 26 acres of prime housing land on the lake. Once the Lakewood Park Peninsula is done, and it has proven itself as a great source of new revenue, we can build another one either further out on the Lake or elsewhere on our shoreline. Westlake can't do that, nor can Strongsville or even Shaker Heights or Chagrin Falls. They are landlocked cities. We can. But will we?
Mankind must put an end to war or
war will put an end to mankind.
--John F. Kennedy
Stability and peace in our land will not come from the barrel of a gun, because peace without justice is an impossibility.
--Desmond Tutu
war will put an end to mankind.
--John F. Kennedy
Stability and peace in our land will not come from the barrel of a gun, because peace without justice is an impossibility.
--Desmond Tutu
-
ryan costa
- Posts: 2486
- Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:31 pm
Most of western Cuyahoga and Northern Lorain is reasonably dense in housing and infrastructure. There is no room for sprawl in Lakewood, so there isn't much to fight. Unless they decide to build one large Elementary school and have kids bussed to it. Or some new eminent domain scheme.DougHuntingdon wrote:generally speaking when cities are dying, maybe they should just bulldoze buildings and plant trees. Has this ever been tried anywhere? Why try to bring the dead back to life? Cleveland has been going downhill since its heydad in the 1920s. It seems like a lot of good money is thrown after bad, especially in all these cities in the rust belt. So what if Independence, Beachwood, or even Lakewood becomes the new "downtown" for the region? Why not let natural things progress? Eventually then these other places will decline and it will be someone else's turn.
Doug
Gary Nabhan wrote an interesting essay about sprawl in Arizona.. He mentions they actually do bulldoze down newer subdivisions out west somewhere.
Some Economists say our Economy will need 100 million immigrants within the next 43 years to meet the needs of The Economy. The limits of sprawl-based economic growth have already been exceeded, if you factor in spillover costs and oil wars, and record foreclosure rates. Some blame our dismal crime rates and poor performance in education to suburbia, as compared to places in western or northern europe which aren't sprawled out. It is possible many McMansions with large lots will become more preferred for extended families: They could pack 10 to 30 people into a house and its yard, many of the men leaving for months at a time to do seasonal work. That will keep the mortgage industry running. More affluent people will flock towards inner ring suburbs and cities and towns, where there is stuff to do without having to drive each time.
-
Donald Farris
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: Lakewood and points beyond
- Contact:
Hi,
Ryan, while we do not have sprawl. We must compete with cities that are growing. My prior post offered good ideas I have heard to help Lakewood compete.
We do not need eminent domain or other "net-zero at best" solutions. We need to grow Lakewood.
I believe "cities are dying" when they stop competing. I guess we can accept a "manage decline" plan but I think our city can do better than that. We can decide to not sit around and cry in our beer about other cities growing.
Ryan, while we do not have sprawl. We must compete with cities that are growing. My prior post offered good ideas I have heard to help Lakewood compete.
We do not need eminent domain or other "net-zero at best" solutions. We need to grow Lakewood.
I believe "cities are dying" when they stop competing. I guess we can accept a "manage decline" plan but I think our city can do better than that. We can decide to not sit around and cry in our beer about other cities growing.
Mankind must put an end to war or
war will put an end to mankind.
--John F. Kennedy
Stability and peace in our land will not come from the barrel of a gun, because peace without justice is an impossibility.
--Desmond Tutu
war will put an end to mankind.
--John F. Kennedy
Stability and peace in our land will not come from the barrel of a gun, because peace without justice is an impossibility.
--Desmond Tutu
-
ryan costa
- Posts: 2486
- Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:31 pm
grow
It is probably easier to annex adjacent areas of Cleveland than to build very much land onto Lake Erie.
-
Mark Timieski
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:47 pm
- Location: Lakewood
The Law of Supply and Demand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
The population of Ohio is not growing, so does it make sense to increase the amount of available real estate in Ohio? From a supply and demand standpoint, a home surplus will drive down property values.
More laws:
Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
Entropy (chaos) is always increasing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
From a physics point of view energy isn’t created or destroyed, it’s just moved around from one place to another. Also important that as we move energy it never stays where we originally put it, but it becomes disorganized as time goes on.
Applying physics to the cities, we find that if we are spending energy to build new, we are spending less energy to do other things, like take care of the things we have already built. Worse, the law of entropy states that everything that exists is in decline (becoming disorganized) and the only way to combat decline is to continually move energy to re-organize.
It seems that we would get a bigger bang for the buck if we focused our collective energy on maintaining what we need before adding to what we don’t.
http://www.greaterohio.org/policy/hist_tax_credit.htm
http://66.145.134.58/Default.aspx?tabid=63
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
The population of Ohio is not growing, so does it make sense to increase the amount of available real estate in Ohio? From a supply and demand standpoint, a home surplus will drive down property values.
More laws:
Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
Entropy (chaos) is always increasing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
From a physics point of view energy isn’t created or destroyed, it’s just moved around from one place to another. Also important that as we move energy it never stays where we originally put it, but it becomes disorganized as time goes on.
Applying physics to the cities, we find that if we are spending energy to build new, we are spending less energy to do other things, like take care of the things we have already built. Worse, the law of entropy states that everything that exists is in decline (becoming disorganized) and the only way to combat decline is to continually move energy to re-organize.
It seems that we would get a bigger bang for the buck if we focused our collective energy on maintaining what we need before adding to what we don’t.
http://www.greaterohio.org/policy/hist_tax_credit.htm
http://66.145.134.58/Default.aspx?tabid=63
-
DougHuntingdon
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:29 pm
I realize analogies can be used for or against anything. However, from a biological point of view, if an old tree is dying and only has 10% of its leaves left (in the summer), what do you do? Do you spend $10,000 putting sugar and miracle gro into its soil, hoping MAYBE you will be able to keep the tree on life support until it dies in 2 years instead of 1?
OR
Do you face reality and cut down the tree before all the wood is rotten, and at least salvage something from the tree before it dies completely and becomes worthless? With part or all of the $10,000 you didn't spend throwing good money after bad, you could plant new trees that may live another 50 years or maybe give a little help to current trees that are having a mild midlife crisis.
This region, including Lakewood, has chosen to spend billions of dollars for Gund Arena, Jacobs Field, Browns stadium, a federal building that looks half built, etc. all placed in the middle of the black hole (not a racist reference) known as Cleveland. These structures are just some of the more visible examples. After all this money has been spent, are we better off for it? Cleveland has been ranking #1 and #2 for most dangerous and poorest city, contending neck and neck with Detroit! How long will this region and others like it continue to ignore reality and just thrown money into a pit? I don't see it stopping anytime soon, when I see projects like the Euclid Corridor under way, massively subsidized condos in the flats, etc.
If you're going to spend money like a drunk on payday, then why not spend it in an area where you have a better chance at getting something for your money? As outlandish as it may seem to some, I think the peninsula Don mentions sounds a lot better than a football stadium that is used for 8 regular season games. As far as urban sprawl in general, I know it is an excuse used by inner ring suburbs that have failed and/or whose time has passed them by. Lakewood has its share of problems, but I don't think it's on life support yet. I think it is in better position than any other suburb that touches Cleveland. Short quote from Wikipedia: "Cleveland's older inner-ring or "first" suburbs include Bedford, Bedford Heights, Brook Park, Brooklyn, Cleveland Heights, Cuyahoga Heights, East Cleveland, Euclid, Fairview Park, Garfield Heights, Lakewood, Maple Heights, Parma, Shaker Heights, South Euclid, University Heights, and Warrensville Heights." Now which of those suburbs even comes close to being as healthy as Lakewood? Depending on your view, I would say Brooklyn, Parma (all kidding aside), Fairview Park, and maybe Brook Park. Euclid? Garfield Heights? MAPLE HEIGHTS? EAST CLEVELAND? I don't think so. (sorry for anyone in those suburbs I may have offended). If you don't realize how bad some of those places are, it may be because you haven't been there in a decade or more (driving by on 480 doesn't count). Now I know a lot of those inner ring suburbs joined some kind of consortium, partly to help "fight" sprawl. The majority of those suburbs are just a just a smaller black hole to big brother Cleveland. Spend a billion in Garfield Heights where Dominos won't even deliver to some neighborhoods, and you're not going to get much different of a return on your investment than if you spent it in Cleveland.
The bottom line is that Lakewood has already contributed its share to throwing money down the black hole of Cleveland. Is the next logical step throwing it down a different black hole by aiding Maple Heights, Garfield Heights, Warrensville Heights, East Cleveland, etc.? Millionaire's Row is nice to read about in history books, but its time has passed. When's the last time you were at Randall Park Mall? It's been a few years for me, and I don't feel like returning after being ambushed by a nasty strawberry in the parking lot in the middle of the afternoon and I'm not referring to produce.
I realize we in this region are all in the same boat. I'm not for shutting off electrical power or bombing Cleveland or the other inner ring suburbs, but is a dollar better spent subsidizing Randall Park Mall in an attempt to attract a pawn shop or is it better spent on a peninsula off the shore of Lakewood? Is it better spent repairing existing potholes on Clifton or is it better spent making the west shoreway a bicycle path for those in the west shoreway area (many who don't work) while punishing Lakewood commuters who do work? Is time, money, or focus better spent on better code enforcement (I am starting to think Councilman Demro is right about the Mayor not properly enforcing codes) or is it better spent on grassy medians and wider sidewalks on Detroit Ave that will severely impact traffic flow but give everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling inside? Speaking of Detroit, the city of Detroit has some of the finest sidewalks (from a concrete standpoint) in a downtown area that I have ever seen...must have cost them a fortune...but where has it gotten them? They have 3 casinos, and some city leaders want a 4th because they are still at the bottom of the heap even after the 3 casinos.
Money is a finite resource. Sometimes people want to throw it around like it grows on trees. We only have so much of it, and I think we should do a smarter job of allocating it.
Doug
OR
Do you face reality and cut down the tree before all the wood is rotten, and at least salvage something from the tree before it dies completely and becomes worthless? With part or all of the $10,000 you didn't spend throwing good money after bad, you could plant new trees that may live another 50 years or maybe give a little help to current trees that are having a mild midlife crisis.
This region, including Lakewood, has chosen to spend billions of dollars for Gund Arena, Jacobs Field, Browns stadium, a federal building that looks half built, etc. all placed in the middle of the black hole (not a racist reference) known as Cleveland. These structures are just some of the more visible examples. After all this money has been spent, are we better off for it? Cleveland has been ranking #1 and #2 for most dangerous and poorest city, contending neck and neck with Detroit! How long will this region and others like it continue to ignore reality and just thrown money into a pit? I don't see it stopping anytime soon, when I see projects like the Euclid Corridor under way, massively subsidized condos in the flats, etc.
If you're going to spend money like a drunk on payday, then why not spend it in an area where you have a better chance at getting something for your money? As outlandish as it may seem to some, I think the peninsula Don mentions sounds a lot better than a football stadium that is used for 8 regular season games. As far as urban sprawl in general, I know it is an excuse used by inner ring suburbs that have failed and/or whose time has passed them by. Lakewood has its share of problems, but I don't think it's on life support yet. I think it is in better position than any other suburb that touches Cleveland. Short quote from Wikipedia: "Cleveland's older inner-ring or "first" suburbs include Bedford, Bedford Heights, Brook Park, Brooklyn, Cleveland Heights, Cuyahoga Heights, East Cleveland, Euclid, Fairview Park, Garfield Heights, Lakewood, Maple Heights, Parma, Shaker Heights, South Euclid, University Heights, and Warrensville Heights." Now which of those suburbs even comes close to being as healthy as Lakewood? Depending on your view, I would say Brooklyn, Parma (all kidding aside), Fairview Park, and maybe Brook Park. Euclid? Garfield Heights? MAPLE HEIGHTS? EAST CLEVELAND? I don't think so. (sorry for anyone in those suburbs I may have offended). If you don't realize how bad some of those places are, it may be because you haven't been there in a decade or more (driving by on 480 doesn't count). Now I know a lot of those inner ring suburbs joined some kind of consortium, partly to help "fight" sprawl. The majority of those suburbs are just a just a smaller black hole to big brother Cleveland. Spend a billion in Garfield Heights where Dominos won't even deliver to some neighborhoods, and you're not going to get much different of a return on your investment than if you spent it in Cleveland.
The bottom line is that Lakewood has already contributed its share to throwing money down the black hole of Cleveland. Is the next logical step throwing it down a different black hole by aiding Maple Heights, Garfield Heights, Warrensville Heights, East Cleveland, etc.? Millionaire's Row is nice to read about in history books, but its time has passed. When's the last time you were at Randall Park Mall? It's been a few years for me, and I don't feel like returning after being ambushed by a nasty strawberry in the parking lot in the middle of the afternoon and I'm not referring to produce.
I realize we in this region are all in the same boat. I'm not for shutting off electrical power or bombing Cleveland or the other inner ring suburbs, but is a dollar better spent subsidizing Randall Park Mall in an attempt to attract a pawn shop or is it better spent on a peninsula off the shore of Lakewood? Is it better spent repairing existing potholes on Clifton or is it better spent making the west shoreway a bicycle path for those in the west shoreway area (many who don't work) while punishing Lakewood commuters who do work? Is time, money, or focus better spent on better code enforcement (I am starting to think Councilman Demro is right about the Mayor not properly enforcing codes) or is it better spent on grassy medians and wider sidewalks on Detroit Ave that will severely impact traffic flow but give everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling inside? Speaking of Detroit, the city of Detroit has some of the finest sidewalks (from a concrete standpoint) in a downtown area that I have ever seen...must have cost them a fortune...but where has it gotten them? They have 3 casinos, and some city leaders want a 4th because they are still at the bottom of the heap even after the 3 casinos.
Money is a finite resource. Sometimes people want to throw it around like it grows on trees. We only have so much of it, and I think we should do a smarter job of allocating it.
Doug
-
Charyn Compeau
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 3:11 pm
Doug,
Your assessment of which suburbs of Cleveland are thriving is dead on according to what I know from various officials in those administrations.
I agree with many of your points, however, my largest concerns about any project that the city itself might embark upon going forward is whether or not that will shift the focus too far from the problem of our aging housing stock. The issue with the current stock is real and lacking a significant amount of owner/landlord investment it will not be changed overnight.
In short, I have a hard time appreciating condos on Detroit, or on the lake, when I drive down a street that has numerous houses with significant structural problems such as crumbling foundations, dangerous wiring, collapsing chimneys, etc. While the new buildings go up - the existing ones continue to age.
These are issues that most older communities face and I believe they are issues that can be greatly mitigated by proper coding and enforcement of existing building codes. I believe some communities have gone so far as to require that houses for sale pass a pre-sale inspection for just this reason.
There are limited resources, both financial and human. With no tax increase standing a chance in the foreseeable future we need to spend out capital wisely - understanding that more dollars for one thing will usually mean less for another.
Always,
Charyn
Your assessment of which suburbs of Cleveland are thriving is dead on according to what I know from various officials in those administrations.
I agree with many of your points, however, my largest concerns about any project that the city itself might embark upon going forward is whether or not that will shift the focus too far from the problem of our aging housing stock. The issue with the current stock is real and lacking a significant amount of owner/landlord investment it will not be changed overnight.
In short, I have a hard time appreciating condos on Detroit, or on the lake, when I drive down a street that has numerous houses with significant structural problems such as crumbling foundations, dangerous wiring, collapsing chimneys, etc. While the new buildings go up - the existing ones continue to age.
These are issues that most older communities face and I believe they are issues that can be greatly mitigated by proper coding and enforcement of existing building codes. I believe some communities have gone so far as to require that houses for sale pass a pre-sale inspection for just this reason.
There are limited resources, both financial and human. With no tax increase standing a chance in the foreseeable future we need to spend out capital wisely - understanding that more dollars for one thing will usually mean less for another.
Always,
Charyn
-
Mark Timieski
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:47 pm
- Location: Lakewood
Doug,
I don’t think urban sprawl is an “excuse used by inner ring suburbsâ€Â, urban sprawl is the thing that makes inner ring suburbs.
To disassemble your analogy:
That old tree was cut into boards, and a house was built. That house is aging (as everything else that exists) and occasionally a board will rot, or the nails that hold the board will loosen (per the law of entropy). My thought is that the board should be replaced or the nails pounded back in. The urban sprawl solution would have us abandon the house and move further away to a new house where we would wait helplessly for that structure to rot too.
ODOT has set aside $500 Million a year to make more roads, guess where they are going.
While I see you dislike the thought of Lakewood residents funding projects in Cleveland, do you think it’s wise that Lakewood and Cleveland is or will be funding projects in Avon and Napoleon?
http://www.avonhistory.org/janas/sj506.htm#n2
http://www.usrt24.com/news_01_14_2005.asp
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/2006Construc ... ction2.pdf
I don’t think urban sprawl is an “excuse used by inner ring suburbsâ€Â, urban sprawl is the thing that makes inner ring suburbs.
To disassemble your analogy:
That old tree was cut into boards, and a house was built. That house is aging (as everything else that exists) and occasionally a board will rot, or the nails that hold the board will loosen (per the law of entropy). My thought is that the board should be replaced or the nails pounded back in. The urban sprawl solution would have us abandon the house and move further away to a new house where we would wait helplessly for that structure to rot too.
ODOT has set aside $500 Million a year to make more roads, guess where they are going.
While I see you dislike the thought of Lakewood residents funding projects in Cleveland, do you think it’s wise that Lakewood and Cleveland is or will be funding projects in Avon and Napoleon?
http://www.avonhistory.org/janas/sj506.htm#n2
http://www.usrt24.com/news_01_14_2005.asp
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/2006Construc ... ction2.pdf
-
DougHuntingdon
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:29 pm
I think we're on the same side on a lot of these issues.
An old house/building, propertly built at the time (whether 1900 or 1800) can last a long time with a minimum amount of proper maintenance on an annual basis. Many structures in Lakewood are proof of this...it will take a major earthquake or intentional demolition to bring them down. If all four sides of a 100 year old barn are falling down, it's time to replace the barn. The place to build the new barn may be on the same site or it may be elsewhere. The site chosen should be chosen for practicality and efficiency, not because of politics.
My post addressed boondoggle projects like stadiums, federal buildings, Euclid Corridor, etc. Roads are different. They are almost never private, and roads in point B are needed when point B is between points A and C. However, I fully trust you that the government is messing up road construction/maintenance.
Your first link addresses the politicization of interstate exchanges. Unfortunately this is nothing new. Look at all the exchanges the former mayor of Brooklyn (one of the Coynes I believe but not that one who was filmed naked on tv) got for 480 while Pearl Road was excluded.
Your second link addresses road construction that includes Maumee at one end. I know UPS has a major facility there. Right or wrong, perhaps this construction has to do more with UPS than anything else...just an idea.
There is one other thing I want to address regarding urban sprawl...the idea of losing our farmland. This has been occurring for many decades. One issue often ignored is that farming is much more productive than it was in the days of LIttle House on the Prairie. Not as much land is needed. I know some of this may be accomplished through new methods that some may question, like genetic bean plant alteration, but that is another discussion. Now Kucinich would have us believe that Lakewoodites are having trouble feeding themselves due to the closing of Tops. jI wonder how his antirust investigation is going. While the new Giant Eagle is a little too busy for my tastes, I can assure you that everyone is getting fed.
Doug
An old house/building, propertly built at the time (whether 1900 or 1800) can last a long time with a minimum amount of proper maintenance on an annual basis. Many structures in Lakewood are proof of this...it will take a major earthquake or intentional demolition to bring them down. If all four sides of a 100 year old barn are falling down, it's time to replace the barn. The place to build the new barn may be on the same site or it may be elsewhere. The site chosen should be chosen for practicality and efficiency, not because of politics.
My post addressed boondoggle projects like stadiums, federal buildings, Euclid Corridor, etc. Roads are different. They are almost never private, and roads in point B are needed when point B is between points A and C. However, I fully trust you that the government is messing up road construction/maintenance.
Your first link addresses the politicization of interstate exchanges. Unfortunately this is nothing new. Look at all the exchanges the former mayor of Brooklyn (one of the Coynes I believe but not that one who was filmed naked on tv) got for 480 while Pearl Road was excluded.
Your second link addresses road construction that includes Maumee at one end. I know UPS has a major facility there. Right or wrong, perhaps this construction has to do more with UPS than anything else...just an idea.
There is one other thing I want to address regarding urban sprawl...the idea of losing our farmland. This has been occurring for many decades. One issue often ignored is that farming is much more productive than it was in the days of LIttle House on the Prairie. Not as much land is needed. I know some of this may be accomplished through new methods that some may question, like genetic bean plant alteration, but that is another discussion. Now Kucinich would have us believe that Lakewoodites are having trouble feeding themselves due to the closing of Tops. jI wonder how his antirust investigation is going. While the new Giant Eagle is a little too busy for my tastes, I can assure you that everyone is getting fed.
Doug