Stakeholder Analysis for Train Avenue

Stakeholder Analysis for Train Avenue

I. Executive Summary

The contents of this report are based on a series of informal interviews conducted with city officials, commercial and residential developers, as well as representatives from the local utilities, a transportation coordinator and an environmental planner. The participants were asked the following questions:

What do you think are the three most negative qualities of Train Ave. and Walworth Run?

What are the three most positive qualities?

What would your idea of success be for the corridor?

What issues related to the corridor would you label as priorities, which should be taken care of first?

What types or mixes of development (residential, commercial) should be the focus of the Train Avenue project, and where are the most likely places for these kinds of development to occur?

Tremont is known for its restaurants, Shaker Heights is known for its architecture. Does this area have a theme? If not, what brand could you see this area having?

What nearby physical or social resources (parks, transit, schools, churches, businesses) could be linked to a new Train Ave. development?

Do you see yourself participating in the process?

Who else might be able to help?

The following report is based on the responses of the interviewees and is a summation of those points represented most often throughout the interviews.

Summary of Findings

a. Positive Qualities of the Corridor

The irony of the situation as described by those interviewed is that Train Avenue, the roadway itself, is both the best and the worst feature of the corridor. Even in its current deteriorated state, it carries a moderate amount of west side traffic to and from the Flats, without impacting residential neighborhoods. Once this stretch of road is repaved, this single significant repair may prove to be the key to revitalizing the corridor.

Surprisingly, other elements initially thought to detract from the area were stated as positives. This included Train’s isolated feel, which could translate into a cozy destination for strategically placed housing, or a secluded place for low-key industry. When seclusion is paired with downtown skyline views and easy access to the heart of the city ― a new understanding of this currently bleak area begins to form.

The aura of the corridor is one of jumbled disarray, but this quality could be used to its advantage. While no one interviewed felt strongly in favor of Train’s current visual appearance, collectively they repeatedly commented on its diverse uses. If order could be brought to this multi-purpose corridor, a unique atmosphere would form through its eclectic feel. Its historic industrial purpose and the current openness found on this stretch of road were all found to be positive qualities. New housing developments such as the 150 housing units currently being developed on the former Joseph Feiss/Hugo Boss Site are also welcome developments. This mix of positives alone reinforces the fact that a unique eclectic quality exists on Train Avenue.

Perhaps the most favorable advantage that Train has to offer is its proximity to numerous locations. From any point on Train Avenue, it takes but a few minutes to reach the Flats area of downtown Cleveland. Train also offers easy access to West 25^th Street, which houses the West Side Market, a rapid station, an array of shopping and dining experiences and nightlife. Train also offers abundant industrial connections such as easy access to West 65^th Street, I-90, I-71 and of course rail. It also offers access to both Lorain and Clark Avenues, where locals conduct everyday business. Train is also in close proximity to many re-gentrified areas with rising property values.

b. Negative Qualities of the Corridor

While this proximity is a positive for those interested in re-developing Train Avenue, it is currently a negative for areas surrounding Train. Train’s negative qualities reinforce its desolate feel, due in large part to its isolation as a result of the layout of the railroad tracks and highways. Almost every interviewee complained of the severed north-south routes. Adding to the isolated feel is a perceived lack of safety; a feeling reinforced by the physical condition of the road, poor lighting, abusive land-uses, unregulated junkyards, brownfields, abandoned buildings and, perhaps the worst feature of Train Avenue― despite a graffiti tag or two to the contrary— an absolute abandonment by any sort of community. Few people pay attention to Train. It is easier to stay away.

This list of negatives will be quite a lot to overcome, yet the most damning aspect that will need to be dealt with is the fact that Train Avenue is an edge, not a center. It falls on the jurisdictional borders of the local CDCs, neighborhoods, as well as city council wards. Because the negative affects of Train’s condition do not fall solely upon one community its situation has been marginalized. Planning priorities of the past, especially the addition of the local highway system, have also added to Train’s functional demise. As a result, Train Ave. has become a place to be avoided; a destination for no one.

c. Linkages

There is a common perception that the area is disconnected from its once-adjacent neighbors. Such disconnections interrupt the natural flow of social and economic forces creating a disengaged network. No neighborhood can exist alone; they are all interdependent. It is believed by many that one solution is re-connecting those neighborhoods disconnected by the interstate. Doing so would create a sense of “place” and link neighborhoods and resources. This would ultimately revitalize the economy and create a positive synergy of social and economic investment.

Possible linkages to capitalize upon include recently revitalized residential and commercial economies such as the West 25^thStreet Market Area, Ohio City, Tremont and the Flats. Linking the Stockyards, Detroit-Shoreway and Clark-Metro neighborhoods is another consideration. Linking to parallel thoroughfares such as Clark Avenue and Lorain are also key. Capitalizing on Train Avenue’s existence as a truck route, stakeholders mentioned it could be used to re-establish inter-modal linkages. This would allow a connection to form between the nearby highway, railroads and the Cuyahoga River. Other linkages mentioned included a continuation of the towpath and bike paths.

On a smaller scale a specific linkage deemed important would be between the Hugo Boss site and the Train Avenue Park around 48^th, as the park and the Hugo Boss site are currently separated by the railroad tracks. A connection here may begin to approximate something like a functioning community.

d. Themes

The following are present and potential themes the stakeholders felt could be utilized for re-development purposes. There was a definite tension in the responses to the question of what was the appropriate vision for Train Avenue. On the one hand many respondents sought to build upon the historic industrial use in the area and felt that any future plan should be exclusively industrial in nature, while others felt that the industrial presence should be minimized in favor of greener alternatives.

Among the various themes suggested was designating Train Avenue as a venue for the “Rails to Trails” program, with a possible link to the Towpath. In many ways, because of the isolation of Train Avenue, it is well suited to green development. Arguments were made that because of the relatively low traffic counts any traffic constrictions would have minimal impact, and would lead to positive results almost immediately. A trail or greenspace would raise awareness of the area, give the area an identity and create a positive increase in property values.

Another possible theme is adopting the model of Martin Luther King Boulevard, creating a slower, more scenic road to balance the otherwise grim landscape currently afforded by Train Avenue.

The other extreme was to create a purely industrial corridor. The argument here is that through planning decisions the area was consciously designed to be utilized by industrial users. In fact this argument would further expand the industrial base and create buffers at the edges to further insulate the industrial uses from the surrounding neighborhoods.

A third view that hoped for a mix of both industrial and residential. Given the recent de-industrialization of the economy as well as the flexibility in the housing market to encompass locales that have traditionally been unappealing most stakeholders were in favor of this compromise. Presently there is some inertia in this direction with the Hugo Boss development and a number of similar sites that may lend themselves to both preserving the industrial character and residential development.

It is also notable that none of the stakeholders interviewed saw this as a potential commercial development site with the exception of one call for turning Train Avenue into the equivalent of the Bedford Auto Mile.

e. Definitions of Success

Framing success resulted in a variety of responses from higher property values through enhancing the housing stock, to increasing pedestrian access and creating a perception of safety. Success from a more industrial standpoint included creating more jobs, paving the road and establishing connections. According to stakeholders success would also be achieved when rampant dumping would be discontinued, infill development would occur, as well as adaptable reuse, and accessible/usable green space. Creating a mixed-use environment, and preventing “big-box” retail from locating were also deemed markers for success.

f. Priorities

Priorities mentioned included fixing the road, creating a safe place, establishing a trail, talking to railroads, preserving green space, area clean-up, property assemblage study and property enhancements. Respondents suggested exploring environmental clean-up funding sources, surveying the current pool of landowners, conducting an environmental review, and looking at the dynamics of the Walworth Run/W. 67^th project for interrelatedness.

g. Potential Development Sites

The following are sites identified by stakeholders as potential development opportunities: Beneath W. 25^th, just off of Train Avenue, is an abandoned foundry with excellent views of the city; The Fremont Creamery Site also with excellent views of the city; as well as another factory site located at intersection of Vega and Train.

h. List of Potential Contributors and Resources

The following are entities that stakeholders identified that may want to be involved in the planning process.

· Private realtors/developers

· CDC’s

· Residents

· Council persons

· City Community Development Department/ City Planning Department

· Cuyahoga County Planning Commission, specifically Jim Danek, and the Green Print Plan

· The Ohio Canal Corridor

· Railroad Interests

· Eco-Village

· Flats-Oxbow

· RTA

· Wire-Net

II. Major Findings/Conclusions

In conclusion, the data revealed many positive qualities to work with and numerous negatives to overcome. A number of responses qualified as both negative and positive. Given the interest groups at the table, combined with their willingness to participate, and the extensive degradation of train Avenue, this project should have no trouble progressing.

According to stakeholders, success and priorities were somewhat universal with a primary focus on resolving safety and environmental clean-up issues. Success will also be met when the suggested potential development sites are utilized; many of which provide excellent skyline views of downtown Cleveland. In theory, capitalizing on current strengths as a means of identifying themes or brands may hasten the area’s ability to identify and attract needed investment.

Connecting, or creating linkages to existing strengths will help to repair disrupted linkages between communities and will help to attract environmentally-friendly industrial economic activity. Linkages with nature were also necessary components of the plan according to stakeholders.

The information provided by the stakeholders offered a comprehensive vision of what is needed for the Train Avenue and Walworth Run Corridor and supplies a solid foundation to continue planning efforts.

III. Copy of Disclosure

The Clark-Metro, Stockyards and the Tremont area CDCs are seeking ideas for the potential redevelopment of Train Avenue and the Walworth Run Corridor. In order to facilitate the gathering of ideas and data the CDCs are working with the Master’s of Urban Planning Capstone Seminar class, taught by Dr. Wendy Kellogg, at the Levin College of Urban Affairs. This interview will be conducted by graduate students working on behalf of the above CDCs.

The CDCs suggested that we interview you for development suggestions and opinions. The interview will last about thirty minutes and any information imparted will be held in confidence. The information will be used in the most general terms with any and all identifying information removed previous to dissemination. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Dr. Kellogg. She can be reached at 216 687 5265.