TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary..............................................................................................4
I. History (prepared by Rachel McCartney)............................................................6
Physical
Pre-History........................................................................................6
Human / Social
History...................................................................................7
Physical Characteristics: Pre-European
Settlement............................................7
II. Environmental
Assessment
(prepared by Rachel McCartney)............................8
The Cuyahoga
River.......................................................................................8
Walworth
Run..............................................................................................10
Wetlands.....................................................................................................11
Water
Quality...............................................................................................12
Contaminated
Sites.......................................................................................12
III. The Built
Environment (prepared by Stacy
Cantola)........................................15
Early Development in Cleveland.....................................................................15
Ohio City Neighborhood
Development............................................................16
Railroads.....................................................................................................18
Infrastructure
Development...........................................................................18
Industrial
Development.................................................................................19
Clark-Metro
Neighborhood
Development........................................................20
Stockyards Neighborhood
Development......................................................….20
Detroit Shoreway Neighborhood
Development................................................21
Neighborhood Changes Between 1940 to
Present...........................................22
IV. Demographics (prepared by Becky Salak)........................................................22
Demographic History....................................................................................23
Current
Demographics..................................................................................24
Community
Assets........................................................................................29
V. Land Use (prepared by Bethany Wagner).........................................................29
2002 Aerial
Photographs...............................................................................30
General Zoning
Map...................................................................................…30
Vacant and Land Bank
Parcels.......................................................................31
Labeled Adjacent Parcels and Excel
File..........................................................31
VI. Transportation (prepared by Don Marti)..........................................................32
VII. Market Analysis (prepared by Jeff Limpert and Richard Proctor)...................33
Land Use.....................................................................................................33
Built
Environment.........................................................................................33
Traffic Flow and
Volumes..............................................................................34
Concerns Related to Market
Development......................................................34
Available Market
Data...................................................................................35
Conclusion...........................................................................................................40
Footnotes
and References..................................................................................43
Executive Summary
Nestled in-between the Stockyards, Detroit-Shoreway, Clark-Fulton, Ohio City and Tremont neighborhoods lies a stretch of road that at one time was an important industrial thoroughfare that was home to many of Cleveland’s manufacturing industries during the mid 1800’s to the mid 1900’s. However, with changes in production practices, advancement in industrial and transportation technologies and competition from other cities and states this region began to see drastic changes that would have far reaching negative consequences for this corridor.
Recently, various locations within these neighborhoods have seen a resurgence in the quality of life for the people living and working in these areas. However, the Train Avenue corridor has not seen such a recovery. This two-mile stretch of road that connects West 65th Street and Scranton Road and lies amid the commercial corridors of Lorain Road and Clark Avenue has continued to see decay. The purpose of this case study is determine what opportunities exist to re-create this corridor in a manner that is consistent with what is occurring in the surrounding neighborhoods and that will create value and a sense of community.
The planning process that is being used to reach this goal has a two-part objective. During the first phase, several planning processes will be conducted to gather as much information as possible related to this study area. The purpose of this report is to provide a site assessment of the Train Avenue corridor and its surrounding region. The data collected in this phase will provide a basis for developing implementation strategies, which is the second part of this case study’s objective.
The information collected in this first phase will familiarize one with the history, environmental characteristics, built environment, demographic make-up, land use patterns, transportation and commercial and housing markets of this study area. This paper will provide a significant amount of information needed to develop implementation strategies; however, the data CD, which can be accessed through the class web site and from the Levin College’s N: drive under the folder “planning_capstone,” contains most of the raw data that will be needed to accomplish the goals of the second part of our task.
While this paper does not specifically present solutions or approaches to solving the complex problems associated with the Train Avenue corridor, some over arching concerns did surface. It is important that in the second phase of this study that these concerns are addressed or at least recognized. Among these concerns are:
· Who should the developments be planned for? Are we concerned with improving the quality of life for current residents or create an environment that would attract economically mobile individuals?
·
Cost of infrastructure – Train Avenue is city owned, hence
where would the capital be generated from for restructuring?
·
Lack of private capital to pay for housing or commercial
developments
·
Environmental Clean-up Costs
·
Accessibility – What is the feasibility of Train Avenue
being a destination?
·
Developable Land – The north side of Train Avenue is
handicapped by the railroad tracks.
·
Demographics – Population and housing trends are showing
continued disinvestment in the neighborhoods surrounding Train Avenue.
I. History
Physical Pre-History
Pre
Historical evidence shows that ice hundreds of meters thick covered the Great
Lakes region from approximately 70,000 to 15,000 B.C. This became known as the Wisconsin Glacier. Evidence of this glacier lies in the
metamorphic boulders that were transported from Canada which contrast with the
indigenous sedimentary rock.1 The glacier carved out the valley
through which the Cuyahoga runs as well as the lake itself. The Lake Erie
shore is comprised of Erie shale (Chagrin Formation), exposed as the bluffs on
the shore. West of the mouth of the Cuyahoga River, the lakeshore is
predominantly the exposed shale. East of the river's mouth the lakeshore is
sand and clay that covers the shale formation. The formation is buried further inland,
but is exposed in the creek valleys which run through the Cleveland area to the
lake.2 The soils that were in the glaciated areas are
generally silt loam and sandy loam soils, where in the non-glaciated regions of
Ohio the soils are clay-based.
Prior to the
last ice age, the Cuyahoga is thought to have been part of what is now the
upper Muskingham or Tuscarawas system. When the glacier scooped the land and
rearranged the existing drainage patterns, an escarpment was formed near Akron.
This caused the south-flowing river to turn north at the barrier, transforming
its shaped into its current "U" configuration. The Crooked River
found its own, new way. Churning north through the glacial debris, it ended its
100-mile journey at Lake Erie just 30 miles from its headwaters.3
During this
pre-historic time the animals that inhabited the region were known as mega
fauna; these were very large animals such as the saber-tooth tiger, caribou,
mastodon, mammoth, and the giant beaver.4
Human/Social History
The earliest
human inhabitants were the Paleo-Indians who were attracted to the big game
animals and were found between 9500-8000 B.C.
The climate at the time was much colder than we experience now—more like
Northern Canada and Alaska and the Paleo-Indians only roamed through the area
following the herds of large animals.
As the climate warmed the low latitude tundra was replaced with a boreal
forest and then eventually with a deciduous forest. As the landscape and weather changed, so to did the lifestyles of
the people. The Paleo-Insians were
replaced with the Archaic people who were not just hunters like their
predecessors, but were hunter-gatherers.
These people only settled seasonally in the region, and it was not until
around 1,000 A.D. when agriculture began in the area that a more sedentary
lifestyle was seen.5
More recent
history shows that beginning around 1600 there was much tribal conflict among
the Indian tribes in the region. In 1655 the first natives of the area, the
Eries, succumbed to their natural enemies, the Iroquois. After this time only small bands of Seneca
and Ottowa tribes remained. Some historians believe that the Cuyahoga Valley
may have been unoccupied for long stretches of time before Cleveland reached
the area. The conflict is believed to
have resulted from the desire of many different tribes wanting to control the
trade with the Europeans, which resulted in only brief occupations by a variety
of different tribal groups.6
Physical Characteristics: Pre-European Settlement
Before the
Europeans arrived the whole of Northeastern Ohio was covered in forest. The trees were mainly deciduous hardwoods
such as oak, maple, ash, beech, elm, tulip, locust, hickory, dogwood, and gum
along with many, many more. The only
coniferous evergreens were hemlocks, which were found on the hillsides along
the streams. Also found on the
hillsides were mountain laurel, service berry, and witch hazel. Blackberries, raspberries, thimbleberries
and strawberries grew everywhere.7 In The History Of Cleveland the
Cuyahoga river area is described as follows:
“The
land…within 10 or 15 miles of the lake is generally ridgy, yet level and good
on top, excellently Timbered. Thro’
these ridges run numbers of small streams, and sometimes large brooks; the
water is always clear with a brisk current…There are also some swamps in this
country, yet I have not seen one which might not be cultivated, and make good
meadows…there are some beautiful small lakes in this country, with water as
clear as chrystall and alive with fish.
In these lakes as well as in Cujahaga River water fowl resort in
abundance in spring and fall”8.
Prior to the
arrival of white man the Northeastern section of Ohio also records great
numbers of elk, deer, bear, wolf, turkey and beaver.
II. Environmental
Assessment
The Cuyahoga River
The Cuyahoga
watershed, which contains more than 37 named tributaries, drains 813 square
miles of land in Geauga, Portage, Summit and Cuyahoga Counties. The Cuyahoga’s lower river basin is one of
the most densely populated and industrialized urban areas in North America.
Currently, the Cuyahoga River
does have an excellent warm water fishery, primarily from the upper State
Scenic River section down to the Ohio Edison dam in Cuyahoga Falls. Species
such as northern pike, small and large mouth bass, rock bass, crappie and
walleye are typical. Recent attention to water quality has produced dramatic
improvements to instream habitat even in the northern course of the lower
River.9
Much attention has been paid to
the Cuyahoga River in the past, and partly for that reason the Cuyahoga
Remedial Action Plan process began in 1988.
The Ohio EPA formed the Cuyahoga River RAP (Remedial Action Plan)
Coordinating Committee which 
Cuyahoga
Watershed
consisted of representatives from local, State, and Federal
agencies, private corporations and citizen and environmental
organizations. The mission of the RAP
is to plan and promote the restoration and preservation of beneficial uses of
the lower Cuyahoga River and near-shore Lake Erie through remediation of
existing conditions and prevention of further pollution and degradation.
In 1999, substantial clean-up
efforts were celebrated as to how much progress has been made since the passage
of the Clean Water Act. A cleaner lower Cuyahoga has opened opportunities for
many different kinds of waterfront activities as well as newly protected areas.10
Walworth
Run
Walworth Run, a culverted
headwater stream of the Cuyahoga, runs through the study area and drains into
the Cuyahoga. Headwater streams are the small network of streams that are
generally less than one square mile and provide benefits to the larger river
system they are connected to. These benefits as documented by Ohio EPA include;
sediment control, nutrient control, flood control, wildlife habitat corridors
and water and food supply to nourish downstream segments with organisms. Even though these streams are known to be a
valuable asset in attaining higher water quality for a watershed, the Cuyahoga
River Watershed communities do not recognize their importance. The burial and
culverting of the headwater streams is an ongoing practice in land development
practices.11
Unfortunately the integrity of
Walworth Run has also been drastically compromised by many combined sewer
overflows (CSO’s) in its reach. These
CSO’s have made Walworth Run a literal sewer during times of heavy rain. When looking at a site that houses a
culverted stream, the desire always exists to daylight the stream to bring back
some of the site’s natural features.
Resistance to this proposition can be understood since there is a
substantial upfront cost, but the benefits can make up that cost over
time. If done properly, a restored
stream can handle much of the non-point source pollution storm sewers direct to
it. In the case of CSO’s, a restored
stream with significant riparian areas can absorb and help clean much of the
wastes before they wind up in the rivers and lakes. “Soil and vegetation can also
filter, transform, bind up, or otherwise neutralize much of the pollutants
found in urban stormwater runoff.”12
Among its many benefits,
daylighting can reduce flooding problems caused by undersized culverts; cut the
costs of replacing deteriorated culverts; improve water quality by exposing
flows to air, sunlight, vegetation, and soil; provide new urban recreational
amenities and wildlife habitat; benefit nearby residents and businesses by
improving property values or generating pedestrian traffic; and reconnect
people to nature by restoring something that once seemed lost forever.13 A 73 page report on daylighting, including
several examples of success stories can be found at the Rocky Mountain
Institute’s website at http://www.rmi.org/images/other/Water/W00-32_Daylighting.pdf.
Wetlands
Evidence of scrub/shrub wetlands is found in the study
area. This would be expected because of
Walworth Run. Small trees and bushes
that are less than 20 feet in height grow in the scrub/shrub wetlands. The
water is close to the surface and next to rivers, lakes and streams. Willows,
spirea and common brush grow well here. The open water of shrub wetland is used
by wood ducks and songbirds. Herons, muskrats and deer are at home in the scrub/shrub.
Map of wetlands in area—dark spots
indicate wetlands. Cuyahoga Planning
Commission Brownfields GIS website.
Wetlands within the Valley are
seen as a mitigation commodity to utilize in other watersheds and are rarely
mitigated within the Cuyahoga Watershed. This poses a problem for stormwater
retention, biodiversity and water quality infiltration. A study to be complete
by the Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan to assess remaining wetlands will
set forth priority areas to protect these last reserves. An effort should be
made to keep wetland mitigation projects in the Cuyahoga River Watershed.14
Water
Quality
The quality of the Cuyahoga
River continues to be impaired for “fishable, swimmable, drinkable” use. The
present conditions greatly limit the access and ecological diversity that could
be part of the river system and the valley.
Contaminated
Sites
RCRA & TSD’s
The project site contains
numerous locations that are registered with the EPA under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (see Table 1 and Environmental Hazard Maps
1 – 3 on data CD). RCRA is designed to provide “cradle-to-grave” controls by
imposing management requirements on generators and transporters of hazardous
wastes and upon owners and operators of treatment, storage and disposal (TSD)
facilities. RCRA applies mainly to
active facilities that generate and manage hazardous wastes. Large Quantity Generators (LQG’s) and TSD’s
facilities must annually report to the EPA the quantities and types of
hazardous wastes managed on the property.
One may request a records report from the Ohio EPA’s Division of
Hazardous Waste Management on what types of hazardous materials are found at
each site. As for clean up, there are
specific closure requirements the facilities must follow when they stop
operating as LQG’s or TSD’s.
Clean-Up Grants for RCRA and
Brownfield Sites
The term “brownfield” according
to the US EPA means: IN GENERAL- real
property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by
the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant.
There are brownfield cleanup
grants available through the U.S. EPA.
According to their website:
Cleanup grants provide funding
for a grant recipient to carry out cleanup activities at brownfield sites. An
eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 per site. Due to budget
limitations, no entity should apply for funding cleanup activities at more than
five sites. These funds may be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum
and hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous
substances co-mingled with petroleum). Cleanup grants require a 20 percent cost
share, which may be in the form of a contribution of money, labor, material, or
services, and must be for eligible and allowable costs (the match must equal 20
percent of the amount of funding provided by EPA and cannot include
administrative costs). A cleanup grant applicant may request a waiver of the 20
percent cost share requirement based on hardship. An applicant must own the
site for which it is requesting funding at time of application or demonstrate
the ability to acquire title. The performance period for these grants is two
years. http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/cleanup_grants.htm
There is also a Clean Ohio
Revitalization Fund and the Assistance Fund (for high-priority areas) that is a
statewide grant administered through the Ohio Department of Development’s
Office of Urban Development in consultation with the Ohio EPA. More information on this fund can be located
at: http://www.odod.state.oh.us/UD/CleanOhioFund.htm.
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks (LUST)
On the project site there are
also several leaking underground storage tanks (see Table 2 and Environmental
Hazards Maps 1-3 on data CD). The
typical businesses identified as having leaking tanks are automotive related,
although many different types of businesses are listed. Clean up of this widespread problem can be
funded or at least supplemented through several grants. The U.S. EPA has grants available for
petroleum brownfields and also has a “brownfields assessment, cleanup, and
revolving loan fund grant” as well as a “Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust
Fund”. All of these funds can be
reviewed at the U.S. EPA’s website: www.epa.gov/oust/rags/index.htm.
There is also
a Bureau of Underground Storage Tank Regulations (BUSTR) operated under the
State Fire Marshall’s Office of the Ohio Department of Commerce. Their mission is to “Effectively regulate the safe operation of underground
storage tanks and to ensure appropriate investigation and cleanup of releases
from underground storage tanks for the purpose of protecting human health and
the environment for the citizens of Ohio.”
This would be a good starting point for anyone interested in the clean
up of leaking UST’s. https://www.com.state.oh.us/odoc/sfm/bustr/
Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
TRI contains
information about more than 650 toxic chemicals that are being used,
manufactured, treated, transported, or released into the environment. (TRI sites can be found on Environmental
Hazard Maps 1-3 on data CD). Various
industries including manufacturing, metal and coal mining, electric
utilities, and commercial hazardous waste treatment, among others are listed.
You can easily find information on toxic chemical releases over the Internet at
www.epa.gov/triexplorer,
www.epa.gov/enviro,
www.scorecard.org
and www.rtk.net.
These websites provide access to
specific data and trend information on individual facilities, counties, states,
or the nation as whole. In addition, you can analyze the data by industry, by
specific media (e.g., air, water, or land), and by chemical.
PCB Sites
PCB Inspected and Notified sites
are simply what they sound like. (Environmental Hazard Maps 1-3 on data CD) On
PCB Inspected sites the particular sites have been inspected for PCB’s and on
the Notified sites the particular sites have notified the regulatory agency of
their use of PCB’s.
III. The Built Environment
Early Development in Cleveland
The City of
Cleveland, prior to being founded in 1796, was primarily unsettled Indian
Territory. Moses Cleaveland, a surveyor from the Connecticut Land Company,
founded Cleveland in 1796 due to its location on Lake Erie and the Cuyahoga
River. At this time, only the lands on the East side of the Cuyahoga River were
surveyed while the lands on the West side of the river were still subject to
Indian claims.
Settlement
within Cleveland was extremely slow at first. A number of the early settlers
soon had to move away due to illness from the miasmic swamps at the mouth of
the river. During the first few decades, the population of Cleveland only
peaked at 605 in 1820.
West of the
Cuyahoga River remained virtually unsettled. In 1805, a treaty signed at Fort
Industry transferred more than two million acres of land west of the Cuyahoga
River to whites in exchange for money.15 The area was immediately
surveyed into townships, waiting for the arrival of inhabitants.
Brooklyn
Township, which encompassed the Train Avenue Corridor area and surrounding
neighborhoods, was founded in 1818. The early settlers of Brooklyn Township
were primarily farmers who farmed wheat, rye, and corn. Early development
within Brooklyn Township was slow due to the small population and separation
from the East side.
Industrial
development in Brooklyn Township, and the rest of the country, was typically
limited to the use of waterpower and the steady introduction of the steam
engine in the early 1800’s. The west side’s first industries were saw and
gristmills, tin and sheet metal factories, shipbuilding, breweries and paper
mills.
Cleveland and
its neighboring townships began to see a dramatic change in its development in
1827 with the opening of the Ohio and Erie Canal. The Ohio Canal changed
development at the mouth of the Cuyahoga River from one stop on the Great Lakes
to an entrepot, which transferred goods from lake ship to canal boat on their
way either to the West or to the Atlantic.16 Cleveland started to
become a major commercial center. With the canal bringing more trade and
commerce to the Cleveland area, Brooklyn Township also began to grow and
benefit.
Ohio City Neighborhood Development
With the
influx of growth from the canals, the immediate west bank of the flats was
dramatically transformed from farm area to a growing village. The area known
today as “Ohio City” began to see much economic prosperity and development. On
March 3, 1836, 2 days before Cleveland's incorporation, the City of Ohio became
an independent municipality; it remained so until June 5, 1854, when it and
part of Brooklyn Township were annexed to Cleveland.17
Although
Cleveland had nearly 6,000 people to Ohio City's 2,000, the two cities became
fierce competitors, especially in the area of commerce.18 This
rivalry was best demonstrated in 1837, when Ohio City residents sought,
violently, to stop the use of Cleveland's new Columbus Street Bridge, which
siphoned off commercial traffic to Cleveland before it could reach Ohio City's
mercantile district.19 The rivalry lasted until 1854 when annexed to
Cleveland. Once annexed, Ohio City became wards 8, 9, 10 and 11 of Cleveland.
The City of
Ohio and the surrounding Brooklyn Township continued to grow and prosper. More
industries came to the area with focus beginning on heavy industry such as
edge-tool manufactures and the Cuyahoga Steam Furnace Company, one of Cleveland’s
first iron-ore manufacturers that employed over 100 workers.
With
industrial growth came population growth. In the mid 1800’s, the City of Ohio
and Brooklyn Township began to experience social changes from the emergence of
neighborhoods and the influx of many foreign-born immigrants.20
Between 1820-1830, less than five percent of Brooklyn Township’s residents were
foreign born. By the middle of the century, nearly two-fifths of the residents
were born in Ireland or Germany. The Irish immigrants primarily settled to the
North along the West Bank of the Cuyahoga River and the German Immigrants
settled at the Southern portion of Ohio City.
The main
commercial thoroughfare was on Pearl St. (W. 25th St) and Lorain
Ave. The building stock along the commercial thoroughfares consisted of
primarily brick and timber mixed-use buildings. The housing stock varied from
stately wood frame and brick Victorian style homes along Franklin Circle and
Clinton Avenue to working class shanty homes that overlooked the industrial
flats.
Some local
industries located in the neighborhood were the West End Lumber Company,
located on Monroe Avenue & West 26th Street, and The Dobeckmun
Company, which manufactured foils and cellophane, was located on the east side
of Fulton north of Walworth Run.
The Monroe
Street Cemetery, which was located on the North side of the Walworth Run Valley
and originally known as the West Side Cemetery, had burials occurring as early
as 1818. This new cemetery was established in 1841 through the purchase of six
acres of land in what was called the Barber and Lord subdivision.21
Today, the Monroe Street Cemetery has approximately 13 acres of land.
Railroads
The next
major advancement in Cleveland’s West side development was the growth of the
railroads. Cleveland's railroad era officially began on November 3, 1849 when
the Cleveland, Columbus & Cincinnati’s lone engine was coupled onto a
string of flatcars near River Street.22 The Cleveland, Columbus & Cincinnati
Railroad opened its first segment, 36 miles to Wellington, in July 1850 and
completed the remaining line into Columbus the following February.
The
Cleveland, Columbus & Cincinnati Railroad’s location along the Walworth Run
Valley would later assist with the west side manufacturing development along
the Train Avenue corridor. The Train Avenue corridor was developed in the mid
1860’s as an industrial thoroughfare that was home to many of Cleveland’s
manufacturing industries.
From the
1860s to the 1960s, railroads served as the principal transporter of goods and
people to and from Cleveland.
Infrastructure Development
Early
settlers in Cleveland were dependent on surface-water supplies from ponds,
lakes, rivers, and streams, and upon dug wells, the latter becoming more
prevalent as population density increased in the early walking city.
Cleveland's first water system began operating in September of 1856. This
system delivered about 38,000 gallons of water per day.
With the
advent of piped water, traditional privies, storage cisterns, and other means
for disposing of sewage rapidly became inadequate.23 The first sewer
in Cleveland was built for surface drainage in 1856. Two years later a basic
sewage system consisting of open drains conveying the wastewater downhill
toward the Cuyahoga River and Lake Erie was begun.24
In 1885,
Walworth Run Street was opened. Walworth Run was named after the Walworth
Family, prominent Clevelander’s. Walworth Run valley was previously used as a
dumping ground. A main sewer was built along Walworth Run to divert sewage from
the river.
The Superior
Viaduct, Cleveland's first high-level bridge opened in 1878. This allowed for
greater ease of passage between the East and West sides of Cleveland, a project
that was almost ten years in the making. The Superior Viaduct still had it
problems with ship passage, and was eventually replaced by the Veterans
Memorial Bridge built in 1918. After the completion of the Superior Viaduct,
many new high-level bridges were built across the Cuyahoga River connecting the
East and West.
The Walworth Run Bridge was one
of the first of the large viaducts built by the city, carrying West 25th Street
over the Big Four railway tracks. The present structure was built in 1888 at an
approximate cost of $421,540.25 In 1911, it was remodeled in
connection with the grade crossing work of the Nickel Plate Railway where the
southerly end was being elevated and extended.26
Industrial
Development
By the late
1870’s, Cleveland was the sixth largest city in the country. Industry was
popping up all over Cleveland and the near west side was expanding. With the
advancement of the railroads, bridges, and technology, development too began
moving south of Walworth Run.
During the
late Nineteenth Century, Cleveland industry was beginning to peak in production,
technology, and labor force. At the time of the U.S. manufacturing census of
1860, the most valuable industrial product of Cleveland was iron, while the
manufacture of items made from iron was also very important.27 By
1884, according to the annual report of the Cleveland Board of Trade, there
were 147 establishments in Cleveland devoted to the manufacture of iron and
steel and their products.28
Cleveland and
its near west side also had contributions to industrial growth from a large
flour-and-gristmilling industry, petroleum-refining industry, chemical
industry, which arose in part out of the refiners' need for sulfuric acid, and
the auto industry.
Clark-Metro Neighborhood Development
German immigrants first settled
the Clark-Fulton neighborhood during the mid-nineteenth century. Czechs,
Italians, Slovaks and Poles followed the Germans. These immigrants were
attracted to the area to work in the nearby industries in the Flats as well as
the breweries that developed along Train Avenue. Originally part of Brooklyn
and Newburgh Townships, portions of the area were annexed to Cleveland in 1867
and 1873.
Commercial districts in the
Clark-Fulton area developed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries to
serve the growing immigrant population. Businesses flourished principally along
Pearl Street (West 25th Street) and Clark Avenue. To the north and south of
Clark Avenue, the single- and two-family residences that characterize the
neighborhood today date principally from the late 19th century.29
Stockyards Neighborhood Development
The Stockyards Neighborhood was
originally part of Brooklyn Township, absorbed by the City of Cleveland at the
turn of the century through annexation. People were drawn to the area because
of the industries, which had developed along the rail lines that ran through
Walworth Run Valley, notably the Pilsner Brewing Company and the Cleveland
Union Stockyards Company.30
The Stockyards neighborhood is
named after the livestock yards located in the area in the earlier part of this
century. Owned by the Cleveland Union Stockyards Company, the yards themselves
(pens, troughs, brick walkways and bidding areas) comprised over sixty acres of
land and in 1920 were the nation's seventh largest livestock yards.31
The Cleveland Provision Company, the city's leading meat packer, moved to the
stockyards in the 1890's with the arrival of mechanical refrigeration.32
The stockyards grew and
prospered until the post-World War II era, when the livestock industry began to
move westward and trucking replaced rail transportation. The yards finally
closed in 1968, after having reduced to thirty-five acres.33
Detroit-Shoreway Neighborhood Development
Originally
part of Brooklyn Township, the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood was absorbed by
the City of Cleveland between 1854 and 1894 through annexations of Ohio City,
Brooklyn Township and the Village of West Cleveland. Detroit Street (Avenue), a
major route leading westward from the City, became the neighborhood's primary
commercial artery.34
Much of this
neighborhoods industrial development was located north of Detroit Ave. along
the Erie shores and south of Lorain Ave. near the Walworth Run Valley and
adjacent to the Stockyards. The Detroit Shoreway neighborhood, along with most
of the others, was primarily a working class neighborhood where most of its
residents lived and worked within the community.
Neighborhood Changes Between 1940 to Present
The neighborhoods adjacent to the Train Avenue corridor continued to
prosper and grow into the mid 1950’s. After this time, all of the neighborhoods
and the corridor began to decline. Many of the business moved out of the region
and country due to lower production and labor costs and incentives offered by
competing cities. The stockyards moved farther west, and the manufacturing
industries began to change due to advancement in technology. The railroads, the
corridors lifeline, also became less important to industry due to advancements
in the trucking and airline industries.
Suburban
flight also became prevalent within these neighborhoods, leading to the loss of
the commercial and retail centers that once flourished within the neighborhood.
The racial composition of the area rapidly changed leading to tensions in the
area. Between 1960 – 1990, the Train Avenue Corridor and its surrounding
neighborhoods had seen better days. Crime and unemployment were at record highs
and the area was declining.
During the
1990’s to the present day, there has been a period of community revitalization.
Reinvestment and new development has been encouraged within the area, and soon
the corridor and surrounding neighborhoods will come back to their early day
splendor.
IV. Demographics
This section covers current and historic trends in demographics in the Train Avenue area. There are a number of maps that show variables at the census block group level for the five neighborhoods surrounding Train Avenue: Stockyards, Detroit-Shoreway, Clark-Fulton, Ohio City and Tremont. A description of those maps follows a description of demographic history and trends for the five-neighborhood region.
Demographic History
Each of the
five neighborhoods has a fairly similar demographic history. They were heavily
settled in the nineteenth century by European immigrants, peaked in population
in the early twentieth century, and have seen a decline in population since
then.
Irish and
German immigrants, who were followed by Czechs, Slovaks, Poles and Italians,
first settled the Stockyards. These
people were drawn by the industries along the rail lines that “ran through the
Walworth Run valley” (http://www.nhlink.net/neighborhoodtour/stockyards/).
Detroit-Shoreway
was also settled first by Irish and Germans in the early nineteenth century,
followed by large numbers of Romanians and Italians. The most recent ethnic groups to arrive are Hispanics and
Appalachians. The neighborhood has lost
half its population in the past forty years: from 36,500 in 1960 to 17,832 in
2000.
The Clark-Fulton
neighborhood was also settled first by Germans, followed by Czechs, Italians,
Slovaks and Poles, drawn by the industries along Train Avenue. In recent decades, Clark-Fulton has
developed into the home of much of Cleveland’s Hispanic community.
Ohio City has also seen a large decline in population since it peaked at 33,000 in 1910. The 2000 population was 10,718. This population decline was due in part to the construction of I-71 and I-90. The proportion of Hispanic residents has been rising in recent decades and was already over 25% in 1990.
Tremont also
lost population after the construction of the freeway separated it from the
rest of the city, and led to the demolition of hundreds of homes. The neighborhood was populated by Eastern
European immigrants beginning in the late nineteenth century. The population peaked at over 36,000 in
1920, and has declined gradually since.
A sizable Hispanic community has formed in Tremont recently.
This first
table shows the drastic decline the entire area-all five neighborhoods
together-has seen during the twentieth century. The second table shows the
change in the racial makeup of the region over the past three decades.
Population
1910-2000
|
||
|
Year |
Total |
% Change |
|
1910 |
127,272 |
|
|
1920 |
148,302 |
17% |
|
1930 |
137,617 |
-7% |
|
1940 |
131,545 |
-4% |
|
1950 |
126,422 |
-4% |
|
1960 |
96,566 |
-24% |
|
1970 |
94,628 |
-2% |
|
1980 |
67,610 |
-29% |
|
1990 |
59,792 |
-12% |
|
2000 |
56,832 |
-5% |
|
Race
Demographics, 1970-2000 |
|||||||
|
Race |
1970 |
1980 |
1990 |
2000 |
1970-1980 %
Change |
1980-1990 %
Change |
1990-2000 %
Change |
|
Black |
1,695 |
3,428 |
5,648 |
9,454 |
102% |
65% |
67% |
|
White |
91,890 |
57,459 |
44,627 |
35,311 |
-38% |
-22% |
-21% |
|
Am. Indian |
0 |
336 |
386 |
429 |
n/a |
15% |
11% |
|
Asian or Pac. Is. |
0 |
641 |
1,028 |
606 |
n/a |
60% |
-41% |
|
Other Race |
1,043 |
5,656 |
8,103 |
8,531 |
442% |
43% |
5% |
|
Two or more races |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2,501 |
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Hispanic Origin |
0 |
9,042 |
12,293 |
16,225 |
n/a |
36% |
32% |
Current
Demographics
The demographic maps were created using 2000 census data at the block group level. Block groups, which are subdivisions of census tracts, are the smallest geographic units for which the Census tabulates sample data. These maps cover a variety of topics: Total Population, Population by Race, African-American Population, Hispanic Population, Median Age, Median Household Income, Family Poverty, Unemployment, Mode of Transportation to Work, Vacant Housing, Owner-Occupied Housing, and Aggregate Cars Available. A brief description of the variable will be followed by a look at the trends observed along Train Avenue.
Total Population
Total population is a measure of the total number of persons in each block group. The map shows that the Train Avenue Corridor has higher populated block groups in the middle, and lower population at the eastern and western ends.
Population by Race
This map shows the population make-up based on several races for each block group. The population is represented by a pie chart for each block group. The size of the pie chart is based on the total population of the block group. The races and origins included in the pie charts are white, black, Hispanic origin, Asian, multiple races and other. For the census, the respondent chooses the race or races they most closely identify with.
This map shows that whites make up the majority in most of the region, with larger black populations in Detroit-Shoreway, and sizable Hispanic populations in almost all block groups. The Train Avenue Corridor is representative of the entire area. It does have some of the largest Hispanic populations in the region.
African-American Population
This map depicts the percent of the total population that self-identifies as African-American. The African-American population along Train Avenue is low compared to the entire region. The African-American population is higher to the north of Train Avenue, and lower to the south of the corridor.
Hispanic Population
For Census 2000, those who identified themselves as of “Hispanic” origin classified themselves as “Mexican,” “Puerto Rican,” “Cuban,” or “other Spanish, Hispanic or Latino.” Origin refers to heritage, nationality group, lineage or country of birth of the person or the person’s parents. Those who identify themselves as of Hispanic origin may be any race.
This map shows perhaps the most remarkable trend in the Train Avenue area: The concentration of Hispanic population nearby. Especially in the eastern half of the corridor, the Hispanic population is quite high. The entire region has a fairly high percentage Hispanic, but Clark-Fulton, and the portion of Ohio City along Train Avenue, has an especially high Hispanic population.
Median Age
The median age is calculated by dividing the age distribution for each block group in half. One-half of the population falls below the median age; the other half is above it. Compared to the entire area, the median age along Train Avenue is young. For all the block groups along the corridor, the median age falls between 24 and 31.
Median Household Income
The median household income is calculated by dividing the income distribution into two halves, one half consisting of incomes below the median, the other half consisting of incomes above the median. The median incomes along Train Avenue are at the low end of the spectrum for the entire region, ranging from around $17,000 to around $25,000. Ohio City has the block groups with the highest median incomes in the area, as well as some of the lowest.
Family Poverty
The census uses a set of income thresholds created by the Office of Budget and Management to measure poverty. The thresholds are based on family size and composition. If the total income for a family falls below the appropriate threshold, the family is classified as being below the poverty level. For example, the poverty threshold for a family of four (with two children) was $17,463 in 2000.
The “Family Poverty Levels” map shows the percent of all families that were below the poverty level in 2000. The numbers are high across the region, and Train Avenue falls mostly in the middle ranges, with 12.9 to 23.6 percent family poverty.
Unemployment
People sixteen and over are classified “unemployed” if they were not at work during the subject week, but were actively seeking work and available to take a job. There is no overall pattern in unemployment along Train Avenue; it includes the entire range for the area. The following table shows the employment figures for all five neighborhoods.
|
Unemployment,
2000, Train Avenue Area |
|
|
Labor Force |
22,408 |
|
Unemployed |
2,958 |
|
Employed |
19,450 |
|
% Unemployed |
13% |
|
% Employed |
87% |
Mode of Transportation to Work
The four modes of transportation considered are car, public transportation, bike, and walking. A surprising number of people walk to work, although car transportation far outnumbers the other modes. Very few people report that they bike to work, and a couple of thousand take public transportation. The following table shows the figures for the entire region.
|
Transportation
to Work, 2000, Train Avenue Area |
|
|
Workers |
18,779 |
|
Car |
14,844 |
|
Public Transit |
2,265 |
|
Bike |
92 |
|
Walk |
1,046 |
Vacant Housing
For census purposes, unoccupied housing units are considered vacant. The vacancy rates along Train Avenue are fairly low, especially when compared to some areas of Detroit-Shoreway and Tremont. Most of the corridor’s block groups fall into the 9.8 to 13.9 percent vacant category.
Owner-Occupied Housing
This is another variable in which north-south trends are observed. Block groups to the north of Train Avenue, in Detroit-Shoreway and Ohio City, have lower rates of owner-occupied housing. The neighborhoods to the south of Train Avenue, Stockyards and Clark-Fulton have the highest rates of owner-occupied housing in the area. Train Avenue, located physically between those two halves, is in the middle range for owner occupancy, with most of the area along the corridor having 32.7 to 46.4 percent owner-occupancy.
Aggregate Cars Available
The aggregate cars variable consists of the sum of cars available to households in each block group. The most interesting trend to note in this map is the increase in the number of cars the further one gets from downtown. The aggregate number of cars is lower in Ohio City and Tremont than in Detroit-Shoreway and Stockyards. Train Avenue mostly falls in the middle range with 264 to 397 cars available per census block group.
Community Assets
This map was compiled to show the community assets located close to Train Avenue. The institutions included in the map are: schools, libraries, recreation centers, rapid stations and public facilities (including power stations, hospitals, and fire stations). The map also includes rail lines, highways and highway interchanges, roads and bridges. These things can hinder access to community institutions, so it is important to include them, and to consider them when looking at the map. Also, there is a table that corresponds with the map, and includes addresses for each location.
V. Land Use Data and Analysis
The most effective way to analyze land
use for the Walworth Run / Train Avenue corridor is to present the data in map
format. Each map discussed below represents
a land use theme that is best analyzed through observing the distributional
trends across the site’s perceived neighborhood. MapInfo is the Geographic Information System (GIS) that was used
to produce each map and the source for the majority of the data came from the
Cuyahoga County Auditor. All of the
data used to create the maps can be accessed through the Northern Ohio Data and
Information Service (NODIS), which is data bank for Northeast Ohio.
The maps in this section and throughout
the report can be accessed through the class web site and from the Levin
College’s N: drive under the folder “planning_capstone.” The maps are saved in .pdf format because
Adobe provides the viewer with the added advantage of examining the image up
close using the zoom tool, while retaining the image’s clarity. The information presented in each map is
intended to be useful on its own, but for a more thorough analysis the maps
should be analyzed against each other.
2002 Aerial
Photograph
In 2002 the Cuyahoga County Engineer
commissioned aerial photographs to be taken of the County. The photographs were compiled and merged to
create one large image displaying all of Cuyahoga County. For the purposes of this project, the
photograph of the County was centered on the Train Ave / Walworth Run site and
the rest of the county is excluded. The
neighborhood boundaries and transportation layers are shown for orientation
purposes. The data layers that are
shown on this map are: railroads, bridges, Interstate, On/Off ramps,
Statistical Planning Area boundaries, RTA rapid stations and the Cuyahoga
River.
This map allows the viewer to survey
the area (as it was in 2002) and to zoom into the image for a more close up
view of the buildings and transportation corridors. The purpose of this map is to assist planners in site assessment
and to orient the viewer using labeled transportation links and neighborhood
boundaries. The observations that can
be made from this map is the density and distribution of buildings, roads and
open space. The map also shows the
degree to which the Train Ave / Walworth Run corridor is cut off from the North
by the wide expanse of train tracks.
And finally, the bridge and labeled roads allow the viewer to examine
the transportation routes that connect the site to the rest of the
neighborhood.
General
Zoning Map
The files
used to create this map come from two different kinds of data, spatial and
tabular. The spatial data (1994 GIS
parcel file) is used to facilitate the mapping of parcel information. The Cuyahoga County Auditor commissioned the
development of this file. Then, the
City of Cleveland’s engineering department periodically updated the parcels
that fall within Cleveland. The spatial
file is linked to tabular data through the permanent parcel number, and this
unique number is used to join the spatial and tabular data to create thematic
maps; as well as graphs and tables. The
accuracy of the maps and data presented for this project is dependent upon how
well the City and County engineers updated the spatial file and tabular files.
This map
allows the user to assess the distribution of generalized zoning (Industry,
Commercial and Residential) against the neighborhood boundaries and
transportation links. The observations
that can be made from this map is that the Train Avenue / Walworth Run corridor
is primarily industrial and that it is a connector for two different industrial
corridors that run along West 63rd Street and Scranton Road. Also, there are three major commercial
corridors within a mile of the study site.
Vacant
and Land Bank Parcels
The source of
this data comes from the updated 1994 parcel file and the auditor’s annual
property assessments; the source for both is the County Auditor. As explained before, the spatial file allows
for the mapping of the tabular data that contains information about the
individual parcels. The vacant and land
bank data comes from the County Auditor’s land assessment file that indicates
land use. Vacant parcels are those that
do not contain a building on its lot and the land bank parcels may or may not
include a structure within its lot.
Land bank indicates that the City has taken the property from the
original owner because they failed to pay their property taxes and the site is
in disrepair.
Because the
data used for this map is roughly accurate for the year 2000, it should be used
as a base map for further site assessments.
The map size is 11x17 and it was purposely sized for easy handling while
in the field.
Labeled
Adjacent Parcels and Excel File
The parcels
adjacent to the Train Ave / Walworth Run corridor were mapped and labeled with
their permanent parcel number. The
parcel numbers are best viewed by zooming into the map until the numbers become
clear. The viewer can then use the parcel
numbers to gather further information from the associated excel file that lists
additional information. Again, the
data’s accuracy is dependent upon the City and County Engineers. This map’s intended use is for the
stakeholder and community analysis. The
name of the associated excel file is “parcels_bordering_corridor.”
VI. Transportation
Train-Walworth
Avenue is not presently a major transportation route on the near West
Side. It is, however, a cut through to
Cleveland’s industrial “flats” from the residential areas in the Clark Avenue
and West 65th Street vicinity.
Train-Walworth Avenue travels in a southwest to northeast direction
dissecting the north-south transportation arteries of West 25th
Street, Fulton Road, West 41st Street, West 44th Street,
and West 53rd Street, that
provide no access and are bridged over the corridor. Wiley Avenue near Scranton
Road is the only at grade crossing of the railroad tracks, and provides access
to West 25th Street via Columbus Rd. The major east-west arteries
near the corridor are Clark Avenue to the south and Lorain Avenue to the
north. The 2.8 mile, two lane road, is
in disrepair and in need of reconstruction.
Graffiti, litter, debris and vacant buildings visually impair the
corridor. There are limited sidewalks
in the area due to the primarily industrial zoning classification. The Regional Transit Authority (RTA) does
not provide service on the corridor, however, there are a number of bus stops
and rapid transit stations within less than one-half mile of the corridor. Interstate 90, rail lines, and RTA Red Line
form a boundary directly to the north of Train-Walworth Avenue. This reduces access from the north;
southern access is limited to the residential streets between Clark and
Train-Walworth. Connection to
Interstate 90 is through a complex route between West 41st, one way
north, and West 44th, one way south. There is also an “Exit Only” to West 25th Street from
Interstate 90. Major intersections are
Train and Clark Avenues, Wiley and Walworth Avenues, and Walworth Avenue and
Scranton Road. Connection to the
Cuyahoga River and the proposed Towpath Trail would be within the vicinity of
Scranton Road, depending upon how the trail is routed through the industrial
valley. There is a Marina located on
Scranton approximately one half mile from the Walworth-Scranton intersection
that would provide direct access to the Cuyahoga River.
VII. Market Analysis
In general, a
market analysis is conducted to explore the development potential of a
particular area. The analysis generally
consists of an evaluation of the existing conditions, a highest and best use
study, gravity model, niche analysis, and several other variables to help
determine the demand and supply for that market. Depending on the motive, the findings can reflect the projected
demand based solely on the targeted market or it can incorporate the
surrounding markets to illustrate the potential effect on that region. For the purpose of this study, we identify
and incorporate the surrounding markets to help determine the feasibility of
developing the Train Avenue corridor.
Land Use
Train Avenue
is situated within a triangular business corridor. Lorain Avenue, north of Train, from West 25th to West
65th is comprised primarily of commercial development. Clark Avenue, south of Train, from West 25th
to West 65th is another commercial corridor. West 25th Street, perpendicular
to the east portion of Train, is a commercial and industrial corridor. With the exception of West 25th
Street, there are only few vacant parcels along the business corridor.
Built Environment
For the most
part, the triangular corridor is densely built; however, many of the commercial
developments are either underutilized or vacant. Underutilized in this instance is classified as a mixed-use
development with one or more vacant commercial tenants. Based on a windshield survey and
reaffirmation from a representative at Ohio City Near West Development
Corporation approximately half of the business-oriented structures along Lorain
Avenue were deemed underutilized or vacant.
That figure declines to about 30% along West 25th Street, and
25% along Clark Avenue.
Traffic
Flow & Volumes
Train Avenue
because of its location does not have a high average daily traffic count. According to NOACA representative, Jonathon
Giblin, a study performed in 2003 indicated that the daily average for the
eastern portion of Train Avenue proximate to Scranton Road was 909. The western portion of Train Avenue
proximate to West 53rd Street had a daily average of 2,921. The average daily traffic counts for Lorain,
Clark and West 25th Street range from approximately 10,000 to
24,600.
Concerns Related to
Commercial Development
Based on the
evaluation of the existing conditions of Train Avenue and the surrounding
region, it would not serve the best interest of the public to attempt to
convert the corridor into a business-oriented avenue. An analysis of the corridor may indicate that it can sustain some
level of business development; however an evaluation of the surrounding regions
disproves that notion. Lorain, Clark
and West 25th Street are struggling business corridors that are
accessible with high average daily traffic counts, which raise the question; if
those heavily traveled arterials cannot sustain healthy businesses how could
one expect Train Avenue to be an exception?
If Train Avenue were to be developed into a business corridor, it would
further handicap the already struggling businesses along Lorain, Clark and West
25th. That is not to say
that the corridor could not support a few businesses, but that would be
determined by the demand of the projected residents from future housing
developments in the area.
Available
Market Data
As stated
above, a market analysis generally consists of an evaluation of the existing
conditions, a highest and best use study, gravity model, niche analysis, and
several other variables to help determine the demand and supply for that
market. To produce these evaluations one needs to rely on various sources of
data to determine what market conditions exist. The majority of these studies
rely on census data to predict the feasibility of a proposed development. The
data that has been compiled will aid in the creation of implementation
strategies related to new housing, retail or industry projects for the Train
Avenue corridor.
Housing
and Retail Analysis Data
The beginning of this section focused
on the built commercial corridor that exists within the Train Avenue corridor;
however, bordering this area are densely built residential corridors that may
possess opportunities for new retail and commercial projects. To help aid in
determining the feasibility of such developments data was collected based on 1,
3 and 5 mile concentric rings. The following four analyses were compiled:
·
Business Comparison Reports
·
Retail Sales Potential Comparison Reports
·
Consumer Expenditure Comparison Reports
·
Demographic Overviews
These reports were duplicated for the
eastern, central and western portions of the corridor. In addition, maps are
included within the data CD to graphically show what areas are incorporated
within each radius. This information was obtained from www.stdbonline.com
and information as to how they collect this data can be obtained from www.ccim.com/review/STDB/OnlineHelp/STDB.htm#FAQs.htm.
As stated earlier in this report, all of this data can be found within the data
CD, which can be accessed through the class web site and from the Levin
College’s N: drive under the folder “planning_capstone.”
The Business Comparison Reports show
statistics based on:
·
Number of employees
·
Where employees work
·
Number of business establishments
·
Number of employees for each business
The data obtained within this report
details where individuals work and specifically for what industry. In addition,
the types of industries that are located in this region are also detailed. From
this report one will see that the immediate area contains 20,211 daytime
employees working at 1,814 establishments. Furthermore, the majority of
employees work in service, retail and manufacturing industries. The majority of
the businesses in this area are service and retail oriented.
The Retail Sales Potential Comparison
Reports and Consumer Expenditure Comparison Reports show statistics based on:
·
Average dollars spent annually at retail establishments
·
Aggregate dollars spent
·
Average household annual expenditures
·
2003 consumer expenditure
·
Expected consumer expenditures in 2008
The data presented in the Retail Sales
Potential Comparison and Consumer Expenditure Reports will aid in trying to
determine what new retail developments may occur in the Train Avenue corridor.
One can specifically examine where and how much individuals are spending.
These, along with the Business Comparison report, will help determine if there
is demand for a new retail development and whether the market is already
saturated for a certain category of retail. A retail market niche analysis
template is included in the data CD to aid in this analysis, if needed.
In the immediate 1-mile radius of the
central portion of Train Avenue there are 10,348 households that earn a median
income of $25,816 producing a total aggregate income of $269,467,408. If one
were to extend this radius one more mile these figures would increase to 27,711
households earning $26,199 producing a total aggregate income of $726,000,489.
The Demographic Overviews show census
data based on:
·
Population
·
Housing
·
Home values and contract rents
·
Occupations
·
Transportation
·
Residency
This information will also be useful in
a retail analysis, but more importantly they provide the basis to perform a
housing retail niche analysis. A template for this study is also included
within the data CD. Some interesting trends that can be noticed from this
information is that both the 1 and 2 mile statistical areas show this area to
have declining population and households based on census data and 5-year
projections that also show declines. In addition, approximately 40% of these
populations have a household income less than $20,000.
One will also notice that median owner
occupied home value is approximately $60,000 and that there is little stability
in the length of residency. Less than 30% of the residents reside in their
homes for more than five years and there is more than a 20% yearly turnover
rate for both the 1 and 2-mile areas. In addition, over 70% of the housing was
built before 1940.
Train Avenue Census Tract Data
The above information was also compiled
for the Train Avenue corridor based on census tracts rather than concentric
rings. This area would represent the neighborhood as being bounded by W.65th,
Lorain Avenue, W.25th and Clark Avenue and is comprised of tracts
1026, 1038, 1039 and 1041. The reason for this is that the analyses that are
performed may be prepared to correspond to an area that is more directly
represented by the land adjacent to Train Avenue.
One drawback to this method is that the
data is collected directly from the Census Bureau’s website, www.census.gov,
and is not packaged as efficiently as the information from STDB. This data is
contained in 3 separate spreadsheets, also available on the data CD:
·
Summary File 1
Presents
counts and information [age, sex, race, household relationship, whether
residence is owned or rented] collected from all people and housing units
·
Summary 3
Presents
detailed population and housing data (such as place of birth, education,
employment status, income, housing unit, year structure built) collected from a
1-in-6 sample and weighted to represent the total population
·
Housing Values
The importance to choosing which data
block that would be used can be seen in the median incomes of the two different
sources. When using the concentric ring method the 1 mile radius, which
incorporated a slightly larger area then the census tract method, had an income
$25,816. This is over $5,000 more than the median income that is calculated for
census tract block of data. More than likely, both sets will need to be
analyzed in some form, thus it is important to have the information available.
Additional Information
Two other items that are included are a
maximum purchase price template and a list of potential sources of funding. The
purchase price template may be useful to show what can be afforded by whatever
population segment one may be trying to attract to this area. For example, that
one that was performed on the census tracts showed that based on current
lending practices, one could afford a home in the $60,000 - $70,000 price
range.
The crucial element to any new
development is whether there exists capital to pay for investment. Considering
the economic conditions of the Train Avenue corridor and the intense
competition for public funding it will be important to research all potential
sources of funding for any project, whether it is infrastructure improvements
or a new mixed-use development. No matter how sensible a project may seem it
will not hold any water if it cannot pencil out financially.
Conclusion
The main
objective of this report is to provide a partial basis for developing
implementation strategies. It is only one of four analyses that will be used in
accomplishing our goal of formulating a workable plan. The information provided
within this paper is to present data related to the history, environmental
characteristics, built environment, demographic make-up, land use patterns,
transportation and commercial and housing markets of this study area.
Accompanied with the data CD, which can be accessed through the class web site
and from the Levin College’s N: drive under the folder “planning_capstone,” one
will have a multitude of sources of raw data to aid in developing implementation
strategies.
Some of the
concerns that surfaced from this initial study prove that the redevelopment of
the Train Avenue corridor will be a daunting challenge. The census data alone
does not portray a positive trend for this area. Population, median incomes,
traffic patterns, housing values and trends, commercial vacancies and other
quality of life issues have shown to be declining or negative in nature, thus
making it harder to encourage private and public investment. This also brings
forward another important question - What would be the highest and best use for
this area based on past, current and future trends?
Would Train
Avenue be better suited to industry, commercial, housing, mixed-used
development or as an important connector to the Towpath Trail? Trends have
shown that the industry that once occupied this area is becoming obsolete. Is
there some possibility to fostering new types of industry to this area and
doing it in a way that will not only increase the economic viability of the neighborhood,
but the quality of life for the surrounding residents?
The
conversion of Train Avenue / Walworth Run to a commercial corridor would be a
hard sell for four reasons:
1. The current
zoning and built environment is industrial
2. It is riddled
with industrial pollutants and tanks
3. It is a
connector road for two other industrial corridors, and
4. There is
already a significant amount of commercial space within a one mile buffer
Before an
area plan can be suggested, consideration must be given to how this roadway is
being used by the existing businesses, and that the City of Cleveland is making
efforts to retain and attract new industrial investment. Also, the health of the stores that occupy
the surrounding commercial corridors must be assessed to determine if the area
can support additional retail.
The concept
of mixed-used development seems that it may be feasible, especially when one
considers the several tracts of land that would be well suited for new housing.
Sites near W.25th, Fulton Road, W.40th and W.65th
have buildings or large tracts of land that may prove to be potential sites of
adaptive re-use. Coupled with the potential of Train Avenue being a major
connector to the Towpath Trail, these new housing sites could be economically
feasible. These sites then could act as nodes that will allow new markets to
emerge and at the same time connect the northern and southern neighborhoods of
Train Avenue, which currently does not exist. However, one concern that does
arise is who are we building the housing for? Considering the economics of the
neighborhood, many residents could be out priced by housing built at market
rates.
Other
concerns regarding the possible redevelopment of Train Avenue include:
·
Cost of infrastructure – Train Avenue is city owned, hence
where would the capital be generated from for restructuring?
·
Environmental Clean-up Costs
·
Accessibility – What is the feasibility of Train Avenue
being a destination?
·
Developable Land – The north side of Train Avenue is
handicapped by the railroad tracks.
These are all
important questions and concerns that will need to be addressed when this study
moves into its second phase. The data that has been collected in the four
separate analyses will hopefully provide guidance as to the appropriate
implementation strategies that should be pursued to recreate the Train Avenue
corridor.
Footnotes
1Beach, David. The Greater Cleveland Environment Book. 1998, EcoCity Cleveland.
2http://urban.csuohio.edu/~wendy/StClr/Chap2.htm
3http://www.cuyahogariver.org/natural_history_of_the_cuyahoga.htm
4Beach
5Beach
6Beach
7Stewart, John Struthers. History Of North Eastern Ohio. 1935, Historical Publishing Co.
8Orth, Samuel. History of Cleveland, Ohio. 1910, St.Clark Publishing Co.
9www.cuyahogariver.org/natural_history_of_the_cuyahoga.htm
10www.ccbh.net/pdf/cuyahoga.pdf
11www.ecocitycleveland.org/pdf_files/healthy.pdf
12www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid277.php
13www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid277.php
14www.ecocitycleveland.org/pdf_files/healthy.pdf
15Robert A. Wheeler, “Pleasantly Situated
on the West Side,” (Cleveland: Western Reserve Historical Society, 1980).
16Wheeler
17Van Tassel and Grabowski, The
Encyclopedia of Cleveland History, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1996).
18Van Tassel and Grabowski.
19Van Tassel and Grabowski.
20Wheeler.
21Vicki Blum Vigil, Cleveland Cemeteries; Stones, Symbols & Stories, (Cleveland:
Gray & Company Publishers, 1999).
22Van Tassel and Grabowski.
23Van Tassel and Grabowski.
24Van Tassel and Grabowski.
25Thomas Campbell & Edward Miggins, The Birth of Modern Cleveland,
(Cleveland: The Western reserve Historical Society, 1988).
26Campbell & Miggins.
27Van Tassel and Grabowski.
28Van Tassel and Grabowski.
29http://www.nhlink.net//neighborhoodtour/clark-fulton/
30http://www.nhlink.net/spa/stochist.htm
31http://www.nhlink.net/spa/stochist.htm
32http://www.nhlink.net/spa/stochist.htm
33http://www.nhlink.net/spa/stochist.htm
34http://www.nhlink.net//neighborhoodtour/detroit-shoreway/
References
Northern Ohio
Data and Information Service (NODIS)
Cleveland
State University
Maxine
Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs
http://nodisnet1.csuohio.edu/nodis/
Cuyahoga
County Auditor
http://auditor.cuyahoga.oh.us/auditor/default.htm
Cuyahoga
County Planning Commission
Cuyahoga
County Brownfields GIS
http://cpc.cuyahoga.oh.us/cpc/
City of
Cleveland Planning Commission
http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/
Neighborhood Link: http://www.nhlink.net/neighborhoodtour/nt.php
Encyclopedia of Cleveland History: http://ech.cwru.edu/
Cleveland Planning Commission Neighborhood Fact Sheets: http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/census/cpc.html
Census 2000: http://americanfactfinder.census.gov
NODIS: http://nodisnet1.csuohio.edu/nodis/
Cuyahoga County Planning Commission: http://planning.co.cuyahoga.oh.us/