What good is community approval when what was approved gets changed?

Submitted by Oldroser on Tue, 03/05/2013 - 00:59.

 Last year, Councilman Cimperman insisted that ODOT not proceed any further with plans for the Innerbelt Bridge until there was a community- wide meeting for us to consider and approve plans. The plans had previously been approved only by "stakeholders," which were composed of large corporations, no small companies included.

I have always been irritated that I am not considered a stakeholder, even though the bridge is in my front yard.

Well, the plans were vastly improved. And, as I have been asking for several years, it did include roses from Fairfield to Abbey, in front of my home. What roses were not decided yet by the Metroparks. I spoke to and emailed information to the individual at Metroparks I was introduced to at the meeting about the fragrant, repeat blooming rugosa roses I had requested, with low growing perennials herbs and self-seeding annuals underneath.

So I was not at all happy to read about a later meeting, the first I had missed, where the roses had disappeared from the stretch in front of my home. Trees, and unspecified trees at that, are now shown.

I wrote Councilman Cimperman as follows:

I wasn't able to make the meeting, first truly public meeting I have missed. I am currently in Antigua, Guatemala, where the weather in the day is 70-80 year around and almost always a blue sky.

While I was happy to see that some kind of roses are to be planted at the entrance to the damnable parking lot, I was not happy to see the the roses along W. 14th from Fairfield to Abbey, in front of my home, which previously showed up although MetroParks didn't know if they would plant tough, thicket forming rugosa roses which I have repeatedly requested, have now given way to trees of some kind.

Elsewhere I saw dogwoods and tulip trees shown, and they are a great improvement over the initial plans with their litter causing seeds. I still can't see what is to be planted along Fairfield.

Why the change?

Please, put the roses back, preferably twice blooming, fragrant roses, in consideration of the repeated requests of a very  concerned resident whose home is right there.

He briefly replied that he was forwarding my email to ODOT, cc: to Director Brown and Myron Pakush of ODOT. Thanks for nothing, Councilman!

This is the reply received from Jocelynn Clemmings, the public relations lady, whose job is to put a good face on things.

Dear Ms. Hinkle:

It' nice to hear you're doing well and enjoying the weather in Guatemala!  I had heard that you had sold you house in Tremont!  Is that not the case? (No, just renting it.)

 Regarding your proposal for roses along W. 14th from Fairfield to Abbey, please know that we did consider your proposal.  Both the Metroparks and ODOT developed several iterations of plantings throughout the Sideyard. Each of those concepts included trees/bushes along W 14th Street (see pages 47-49 of www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/NewsInformation/Documents/1.8.GatewayTremont.Final.Updated_sm.pdf presentation).  Trees and bushes were chosen because the Metroparks have been kind enough to accept maintenance responsibility for this area they, along with other public and stakeholder input, wish to pursue a more streamlined, attractive and easily maintainable solution as shown in the plans.

(I am happy the Metroparks will be responsible, I like the Sideyard on the other side of W. 14th. However, I submit that my proposal were things requiring very little maintenance. I believe fragrant roses that bloom more than once are attractive. I can't tell from the plans what trees will be planted in front of my home. Will grass, which needs to be mowed, be planted under trees, instead of low growing plants that would not need to be mowed?)

 The plan as it is today, was developed and approved by focus groups over multiple meetings, was presented at two public meetings (public comments were accepted following BOTH of those meetings both in writing and online) and was recently approved with commendation by the City of Cleveland Planning Commission. None of those groups objected to the trees and bushes lining W 14th Street, nor did anyone request roses be planted in their stead.

(As I said, I was at the 2012 public meeting and I spoke to and emailed information to the individual at Metroparks I was introduced to at the meeting about the fragrant, repeat blooming rugosa roses I had requested, with low growing perennials herbs and self-seeding annuals underneath. I have been writing and requesting these for several years. The 2013 was the first public meeting I missed, so the "no one requested roses" is totally wrong. Unless, of course, she means none of the so-called stakeholders, none of whom live next to the Bridge.)

Because of this, the Department will no longer consider your proposal for roses along W. 14th from Fairfield to Abbey.  I understand that you will be disappointed by this, but please know that the community as a whole is very pleased with the plan for transforming this area into a more livable, walkable and engaging Tremont. 

 If you have any additional questions, please let me know!  

 Safe & Pleasant Travels,

 Jocelynn Clemings   

( categories: )

Inner Belt update Tremont

(please see extensive plan referenced in Anita's post above)

Thanks Anita for staying on top of this - those plans are wild.  Blueberry Hill?  Cleveland Rocks?? Wow - so glad I got out of landscape architecture.  That sideyard kids' nature park next to the highway??!  Roses would have been amazing, instead and much less maintenance (for the Metroparks??)  What nut-job parent would let their kid play in the run off from a highway...oh well!  Cleveland...aaaarrgh!