Big Creek

Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative
Prepared by
Big Creek Connects
March, 2015
Relocation & Restoration Initiative i
Principal author: Bob Gardin – Executive Director, Big Creek Connects

bgardin@bigcreekconnects.org
Project assistance: Matt Hils – Principal, Behnke Associates
Matt Scharver – Watershed Team Leader, Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer
District
Technical assistance: Paul Kovalcik – Stormwater Projects Specialist, Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer
District
Map development: Daniel Meaney – Manager, Information & Research, Cuyahoga County Planning
Commission
Concept plan generation: Aaron Morford – Board Member, Big Creek Connects
Graphic renderings: Brian Pagnotta – Geographic Information Systems consultant
Print layout: Mary Ellen Stasek – Board Chair, Big Creek Connects
Funding provided by:
Ver. 10.4
Relocation & Restoration Initiative i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 4
Area of Study
History of Study Area....................................................................................................... 6
Communities Established
Metropolitan Park System
Interstate 71 Construction
Post –construction of I-71
Existing Conditions........................................................................................................ 11
Defining the Problems ................................................................................................... 14
Transportation
Economic
Environmental
Social/Cultural
Potential Alternatives .................................................................................................... 20
Transportation Infrastructure
Economic & Community Development
Watershed/Stream Restoration
Recreational Space
Neighborhood Connections
Combined Transportation, Development, Restoration, Recreation
and Neighborhood Connection Opportunities
Concept Plan A
Concept Plan B
Concept Plans C-1, C-2, C-3
Design Considerations ................................................................................................... 43
Stream Alignment
Highway/Railroad Alignments
Roadways
Recreational Trails
Other Land Uses
Cost Estimates ................................................................................................................ 50
Next Steps & Recommendations .................................................................................... 51
Establishing Partnerships/Community Engagement
TLCI / Other Studies
Funding
Timing
References ....................................................................................................................... 53
Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................... 54
ii Big Creek / I-71

APPENDICES
A. Timeline of notable events related to Study Area
B. Community Demographics (2010)
City of Brooklyn; City of Cleveland Neighborhoods: Old Brooklyn & Stockyards
C. Watershed/Drainage Maps
Natural Features: Streams (Watershed)
Land Use 2012 (Watershed)
Problems in Modeled Drainage System, NEORSD (Study Area)
Sanitary/Storm Sewers (Focus Area)
D. Highway Studies
Corridor Report for Interstate and Alternative Routes in the Cuyahoga County
Freeway System (1957):
Figure 13: Recommended Cuyahoga County Freeway System (plan)
Figure 41: Medina Freeway – Big Creek Valley (aerial)
Parma Freeway Route Location Study (1966):
Page 15: Interchange Studies (narrative)
Page 16: Figure 5 - Aerial View of Medina-Parma Freeway
Plate 10: Preliminary Design – Big Creek Valley
E. Greenway/Trail Plans
Proposed Cuyahoga County Park and Boulevard System, June 1916
Proposed Big Creek Greenway Population Buffer Map (2006)
Existing and Planned Pedestrian and Bike Trails – Brooklyn Master Plan (2006)
Lower Big Creek Greenway & Restoration Plan – Overall Map (2008)
Big Creek Greenway Trail Alignment & Neighborhood Connector Plan - Overall Master Plan
(2009)
F. Cleveland Metroparks 2020 Plan: Brookside Reservation/Cleveland Metroparks Zoo
Existing Conditions Summary
Concept Plan - map
Concept Plan - table
G. Stream/Highway Overlay Maps - 1937 vs. 2006
1937 Base Map
2006 Base Map
H. Cost Estimate Details for Concept C-3
I. Project Scope & Deliverables for TLCI Planning Grant
J. Ohio Balanced Growth Program Overview
K. Big Creek Connects Profile
Relocation & Restoration Initiative iii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Study and Focus Areas map
Figure 2: Big Creek – Brooklyn Twp map (1912)
Figure 3: Big Creek – Parma Freeway proposal (c.1966)
Figure 4: Brooklyn Master Plan: Current Land Use Map (2006)
Figure 5: Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan: Stockyards – Existing Land Use (2007)
Figure 6: Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan: Stockyards Typology and Housing Projects (2007)
Figure 7: Brooklyn Master Plan: City-Wide Plan, p.124 (2006)
Figure 8: Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study: Treatment Diagram (2007)
Figure 9: Brooklyn Master Plan: Clinton Road Focus Area, p.98 (2006)
Figure 10: West 65th Street Corridor Plan: Separated all-purpose-trail (2013)
Figure 11: West 65th Street Corridor Plan: South Industrial Area Concept plan (2013)
Figure 12: Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan - PCA/PDA Map (2013)
Figure 13: Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan: Storage at Highway Interchanges (2010)
Figure 14: Existing Conditions
Figure 15: Concept Plan A
Figure 16: Concept Plan B
Figure 17: Concept Plan C-1
Figure 20: Southwest Aerial rendering – Existing
Figure 21: Southwest Aerial rendering – Concept Plan B
Figure 22: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Existing
Figure 23: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Proposed
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Costs
PHOTO CREDITS
Page 17 Flood waters entering triple culverts in Zoo courtesy of Cleveland Metroparks; all other photographs
courtesy of Big Creek Connects.
iv Big Creek / I-71

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Big Creek / I-71 Relocation and Restoration Initiative looks at a number of environmental, economic,
and community challenges and opportunities in the heart of a highly urbanized area straddling the cities of
Cleveland and Brooklyn, Ohio. It questions the value of the Denison Avenue partial interchange and
proposes removing part of its ramps and opening up land that will allow the stream to be naturalized by re-
routing it into much of its historic streambed, thus addressing flooding, erosion and water quality issues and
allowing fish passage upstream into the Big Creek Reservation and other areas.
As study progressed, broader transportation, economic, community and land use issues were examined.
Industrial, retail and other commercial activity was found to be underperforming, particularly in the
industrial areas north of the area of concern in both cities. And, housing in the Stockyards and adjacent
Cleveland neighborhoods was found to be distressed, due in part to the lack of community assets found in
other neighborhoods. Several alternatives to address many of these issues, both planned and proposed, were
examined.
Concept plans were developed that propose the stream re-alignment along with expanded recreational space
and a trail system that connects the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations to each other and the
surrounding communities. Another set of concept plans add a new I-71 interchange at Ridge Road to
capitalize on its economic potential and its potential to divert truck traffic away from residential areas. They
propose that the interchange would help address issues related to urban sprawl and redirect investment into
this urban core.
Land, stream, highway, roadway and trail data based on these concept plans were calculated along with cost
estimates. However, there is a need for further study that will:
 Solicit public input

 Assess economic impacts
 Perform traffic modeling, and
 Develop a preferred plan with recommendations
This study acts as the foundation for a planning grant that will address these needs. In March of 2015 the
City of Brooklyn, in partnership with the City of Cleveland and Big Creek Connects, applied for funding for
this purpose through the Northeast Ohio Coordinating Agency’s Transportation for Livable Communities
Initiative (TLCI) grant program. Grant award announcements are anticipated in June 2015.
During Interstate 71’s construction in the 1960’s the “Parma Freeway” was planned to combine with I-71 in
the Big Creek valley in a “weave-free, braided-type interchange”. In order to make room for this extensive
infrastructure, the land above the natural meander of the creek was cut and leveled, the railroad line was
moved southward and Big Creek was placed in a concrete lined channel parallel to it. A “drop structure” was
constructed in Brookside Park to make up for the 26’ elevation difference due to the loss of the stream’s
natural meander. The planned freeway alignment north to I-90 was eventually abandoned and left the
Denison Access ramps that remain to this day.
Each concept plan in this study proposes constructing two sets of short bridges to allow Big Creek to leave
its one mile concrete channel and meander north under the railroad and highway into much of its original
stream bed. The stream will then bridge back under the freeway and railroad and re-connect with its existing
stream bed in Brookside Reservation, just down-stream from the drop structure.
Relocation & Restoration Initiative 1

An extensive recreational trail network could be realized, following the new stream alignment, and
connecting the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations with each other and the surrounding communities.
 Concept Plan A proposes the removal of most of the Denison Access ramps without a new
interchange in an alternate location. Combined with relocating the Cleveland Police firing range,
over 50 acres of underutilized land could be opened up to potential environmental remediation and
recreational use. Each concept plan envisions:
o 10 acres stream/floodplain
o 25 acres recreational space
o 15 acres roadways, parking, other uses
o 1.5 miles new access roads/parkway
o Over 5 miles new all-purpose trails
Taken together, these changes could significantly alter the neighborhood character, housing value,
and quality of life of residents in the Stockyards and adjacent neighborhoods.
 In addition to these features, Concept Plan B proposes a new interchange at Ridge Road to capitalize
on its economic potential and its potential to divert truck traffic away from residential areas.
Although a full interchange may be more valuable than the existing partial interchange, concerns were
raised that the loss of the I-71 Denison Access ramps may cause a burden to industrial and commercial
activity currently dependent on it.
This led to the development of three concept plans that build on a previously proposed idea of constructing
a connector road from the Denison Access ramps to Ridge Road utilizing the existing road network in the
Ridge Road [Waste] Transfer Station:
 Concept Plan C-1 proposes to make the connection to the new industrial access road with West 58th
Street only. It assumes that traffic from West 56th Street will use Denison Avenue to reach West 58th
Street and the new industrial access road.
 Concept Plan C-2 proposes that West 56th Street be extended south, then across the modified access
ramp, where the grades are level with each other, to connect with West 58th Street and the new
industrial access road.
 Concept Plan C-3 proposes re-building the Denison Access bridge over the Norfolk-Southern railroad
to accommodate an extension of Tradex Parkway, connecting West 56th Street with West 58th Street.
Although the most costly alternative, this option would provide a direct connection between these
streets while maintaining a grade separation between industry and recreational users.
Big Creek Connects estimated land, stream, highway, roadway and trail data based on these conceptual
plans. These figures were further defined and cost estimates were calculated by one of the private consulting
firms providing pro-bono services for this study. A contingency of 30% was figured into the costs. However,
the calculations do not consider potential land acquisition, environmental remediation, wetland
construction, facility re-location or landscaping costs. The total budget for each concept ranges from
$83,130,000 for Concept A to $115,900,000 for Concept C-3.
The TLCI planning grant, if awarded, will further evaluate these concept plans with input from the public
and develop a preferred plan that will include a planning level cost estimate, a phasing/implementation
strategy and identify funding sources.
2 Big Creek / I-71

INTRODUCTION
The Big Creek / I-71 Relocation and Restoration Initiative looks at a number of environmental, economic,
and community challenges and opportunities in the heart of a highly urbanized area straddling the cities of
Cleveland and Brooklyn, Ohio. It seeks to address several deficiencies in the transportation infrastructure
along a section of Interstate 71 and their impacts both within and beyond the study area. It looks at how the
creek running along the freeway may be returned to a more naturalized state. And, it seeks to improve
existing land uses adjacent to the area, increase their connectivity to the adjacent neighborhoods, and
enhance the livability and economic vitality within the surrounding communities.
Interstate 71’s Denison Avenue access ramps and the over one mile of concrete channel of Big Creek would
not have been constructed if the proposed “Parma Freeway” running north/south through the area was not
planned for several decades ago. Fortunately, the freeway never materialized. But its abandoned
construction left a number of environmental and connectivity problems in its wake.
Over the last several years, potential greenway/trail alignments and watershed restoration practices were
examined within this area of concern. Problems identified along and downstream from the channelized
section of the creek included erosion and flooding issues, the lack of water storage capacity, the degradation
of water quality, and loss of aquatic habitat. As study progressed, broader transportation, economic,
community and land use issues were incorporated into the research. Industrial, retail and other commercial
activity was found to be underperforming, particularly in the industrial areas north of the area of concern in
both cities. And, housing in the Stockyards and adjacent Cleveland neighborhoods was found to be
distressed, due in part to the lack of community assets found in other neighborhoods.
Several alternatives to address many of these issues, both planned and proposed, are examined in this
document. Included are conceptual plans that look at significant changes to the existing highway
infrastructure. Each considers the economic development potential these changes could effect in the
adjacent communities, particularly for industry. They envision naturalizing Big Creek by routing a section of
it into an area of its former streambed. And, they look at opportunities for expanding the Cleveland
Metroparks’ Brookside and Big Creek Reservations and improving their connectivity with the surrounding
communities.
Design considerations in the development of each concept plan are explained. To help visualize the
concepts, aerial and ground level renderings were developed. Cost estimates are given for each concept plan
based on ODOT’s Procedures for Budget Estimating. Finally, next steps and recommendations are given.
Representatives of the cities of Cleveland and Brooklyn, various public agencies and private consultants have
agreed that, upon completion of this study, funding should be sought through sources including NOACA’s
Transportation for Livable Communities Initiative (TLCI) program for a next phase of study that will solicit
public input, assess economic impacts, perform traffic modeling, and develop a preferred plan and
recommendations. This study sets the foundation for this and subsequent phases of study.

METHODOLOGY
During the development of the Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan and the two Big Creek
Greenway Plans beginning in 2008, the organization Friends of Big Creek, renamed Big Creek Connects in
2014, coordinated research of watershed and stream restoration opportunities that included the relocation of
Big Creek north of I-71 as an alternative. In 2012 study expanded to include transportation, economic and
community development, and greenway/trail challenges and opportunities that developed into the Big
Creek/I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative. A full list of references of study can be found near the end of
this document.
By September 2013 specific problem areas were identified, existing and potential alternatives were evaluated,
and two concepts plans were developed. Technical assistance and guidance on the format of this study was
provided by professional consultants and Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District (NEORSD) staff while
additional input was sought that included representatives from each city, and through meetings with
representatives from the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), Cleveland Metroparks, the
Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), the Ohio EPA, and with staff from the two
Cleveland community development organizations representing the focus area: the Old Brooklyn
Community Development Corporation and the Stockyards, Clark Fulton, Brooklyn Centre Community
Development Office.
In October 2013 Big Creek Connects’ executive director, joined by NEORSD representatives, presented a
draft of this first phase of study and concept plans to council and administrative representatives of the cities
of Cleveland and Brooklyn separately to gain their interest in further study. During these first meetings,
representatives from each city agreed that, due to the complexity of the issues this initiative seeks to address,
this first phase of study should be completed before the two cities and other potential partners commit to
dedicating resources and pursuing funding for further study that would contain the critical public input
component and assess traffic and economic impacts. It was noted that this document would provide the
foundation for this next phase of study, with a Transportation for Livable Communities Initiative grant as its
most likely source of funding.
As study progressed, the director discussed or met with additional community, non-governmental
organization and university representatives and professional consultants to gain their input on specific
aspects of the initiative. An effort was made to meet or talk with all major business owners in the vicinity of
the Denison Access ramps. For full a list of the individuals where input was given, see the acknowledgements
page. Additional data was compiled, potential alternatives and concept plans were further refined and
graphic renderings and cost estimates were developed for final review by both cities in February 2015.
Funding in the amount of $32,000 for this study was provided, in part, through watershed operating support
grants funding from the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, and through direct contributions from the
City of Brooklyn and by the two Cleveland City Councilmen representing the wards north and south of the
study area: Councilman Brian J. Cummins, Ward 14 and Council President Kevin J. Kelley, Ward 13,
respectively. In addition, Big Creek Connects was able to leverage a considerable amount of in-kind, pro-
bono and volunteer assistance from federal, state and local government departments and agencies, several
professional consultants, and board members with expertise in key technical areas. Including these
contributions, the total value of this study is approximately $60,000.00.
AREA OF STUDY
The Focus Area of this study encompasses a section of the Big Creek valley that straddles the present day
communities of Brooklyn and Cleveland, Ohio (See Figure 1). This section of the valley runs approximately
4 Big Creek / I-71
2-1/4 to 3-3/4 miles upstream from the Cuyahoga River and, in addition to Big Creek and the CSX rail line,
contains Interstate 71 as its most dominant feature. Just upstream from this area lies Memphis Picnic Area
in Cleveland Metroparks’ Big Creek Reservation. On the downstream end lie Metroparks’ Brookside
Reservation and Cleveland Metroparks Zoo. Ridge Road runs north-south through the center of the area. It
is within this area that conceptual plans for land use changes were developed.
Figure 1: Study and Focus Areas
Broader environmental, transportation, economic and social factors related to the Focus Area of this study
reach much further. However, it was felt that a defined area of study that included only their more
immediate impacts was necessary. For its environmental impacts, the Study Area included Big Creek
through the city of Brooklyn and Cleveland en route to its confluence with the Cuyahoga River. For social
and economic impact purposes, the area included all of the City of Brooklyn, part of the City of Cleveland’s
Old Brooklyn neighborhood, all of the city’s Stockyards neighborhood, and to some degree its adjoining
neighborhoods including Brooklyn Centre, Clark-Fulton and West Boulevard, among others. For
transportation purposes, the Study Area included I-71 from its merger with I-90 and the Jennings Freeway
on the east, to West 130th Street on its west; and from I-90 to the north to I-480 and Brookpark Road to the
south.

HISTORY OF STUDY AREA
Big Creek drains nearly 39 square miles from all or part of 7 present day communities – Cleveland,
Brooklyn, Brook Park, Parma, Parma Heights, Linndale and North Royalton. The main stem of Big Creek
begins in North Royalton and runs 12 miles until emptying into the Cuyahoga River. The northern border of
the watershed follows Denison Avenue along a ridge representing a portion of ancient lake beaches. The
lower Big Creek valley runs parallel and just south of this ridge.
COMMUNITIES ESTABLISHED
In 1796 the Connecticut Land Company laid out the Connecticut Western Reserve into five mile square
townships including Brooklyn Township, just west of the Cuyahoga River. A prominent feature of the area
was the Big Creek valley, as the stream traversed north then east through the middle of the township en-
route to the Cuyahoga. Permanent settlement in the township began in the early part of the 19th century
along the present day Pearl Road before expanding westward. North of the lower Big Creek valley, Brooklyn
Centre was settled, expanded as Brooklyn Village in 1867 and was annexed by the city of Cleveland by 1894.
South of the valley, the Brighton community was incorporated as South Brooklyn Village in 1889 before
being annexed by the city of Cleveland in 1905.
By the end of the 19th century, the lower Big Creek valley between these communities contained several
factories and two east-west railroad lines. Further upstream, Cleveland’s Brooklyn Park was established in
1894, expanded and renamed Brookside in 1897. By 1907, the Cleveland Zoological Park began transferring
from its former site at Wade Park to the eastern part of Brookside.
North of this study’s focus area Cleveland continued to expand westward into the area that became known
as the Stockyards neighborhood, due to the livestock yards along West 65th Street. West of Ridge Road, the
City of Cleveland’s West Park Cemetery was established in 1900. The property extended south into the Big
Creek valley, but plans for burial grounds there were never realized. To the west of our focus area, the
Linndale community prospered briefly around a railroad station and incorporated as a Village in 1902. The
following year Cleveland annexed most of the community into the area that now comprises a large part of
the West Boulevard neighborhood.
By 1912, except for a railroad line traversing through the valley and Ridge Road crossing north-south across
it, the focus area of this study and the remaining township to the south was dominated by small farmsteads
with Big Creek remaining in its natural state (See Figure 2). In 1922 a Ridge Road concrete arch high level
bridge was built across the valley.
Most of what remained of Brooklyn Township was established as the Village of Brooklyn in 1927 and
incorporated as the City of Brooklyn in 1950. The city developed its civic center along Memphis Avenue,
just west of Ridge Road. The former South Brooklyn area of Cleveland expanded south and westward to its
border with Brooklyn along or just east of Ridge Road. The area became known as the Old Brooklyn
neighborhood of Cleveland to distinguish it from the newer City of Brooklyn.
6 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 2: Brooklyn Township 1912. Showing Big Creek alignment prior to Interstate 71
METROPOLITAN PARK SYSTEM

In 1905, City of Cleveland Engineer William A. Stinchcomb, who later became the first director of the
Cleveland Metropolitan Park District, envisioned a metropolitan park system that included a boulevard
following Big Creek north of Brookpark Road, through this study’s focus area. Over the years, several
versions of the plan were developed that included this greenway as the park system expanded. (See Proposed
Cuyahoga County Park and Boulevard System, June 1916 map in Appendix E)

Only a small part of Stinchcomb’s vision was eventually realized within the city of Brooklyn however, with
the establishment of Big Creek Reservation’s Memphis Picnic Area. The city did however, gain access to Big
Creek Reservation and its parkway at its southern border with Parma and to Brookside Reservation along its
northeast border with Cleveland. Ridge Road remains the primary entry to Brookside via John Nagy
Boulevard for both cities, since its Denison-Fulton vehicular entrance was closed in 1996 and later converted
to a multi-purpose trail.
INTERSTATE 71 CONSTRUCTION
As the suburban communities surrounding Cleveland expanded, the desire for an extensive freeway system
increased. In 1957 the Corridor Report for the Cuyahoga County Freeway System was completed. The report
recommended routing the “Medina Freeway” - designated Interstate 71 - south from downtown Cleveland,
west through the Big Creek valley, then south again through the heart of the city of Brooklyn. It would
combine with an “Airport Freeway” within the valley in a “weave-free, braided-type interchange”. The
Airport Freeway would continue west through the valley then turn south to the airport. Going north, it
would connect with the “Northwest Freeway” designated Interstate 90. (See Recommended Freeway System
map in Appendix D)
By 1966 an updated Route Location Study for the Parma Freeway proposed I-71 to instead follow the Airport
Freeway route south, while the section through the city of Brooklyn was to become the Parma Freeway and
include an interchange at Memphis Avenue en route to its termination near the border of Parma and North
Royalton (See Figure 3).
In order to make room for this extensive infrastructure, the land above the natural meander of the creek was
cut and leveled, the railroad line was moved southward and Big Creek was placed in a concrete channel
parallel to it. A “drop structure” was constructed in Brookside Park to make up for the 26’ elevation
difference due to the loss of the stream’s natural meander. The planned freeway alignment north to I-90 was
later abandoned and left the Denison Access ramps that remain to this day. Eventually, plans for the Parma
Freeway cutting through the cities of Brooklyn and Parma were also abandoned. By 1967, I-71 was complete
from the airport to Fulton Road. Full interchanges were built at Fulton Road and West 130th Street, while
Bellaire Road received a partial interchange.
8 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 3: Cuyahoga County Atlas - c.1966. Showing Proposed Parma Freeway

POST-CONSTRUCTION OF I-71
As Interstate 71 sliced through the Big Creek valley, it cut the West Park Cemetery property off from its
northern section. In 1978 the city of Cleveland sold the land to the city of Brooklyn to be “used for
recreational purposes only” and relocated its police firing range from there to an area north of the freeway,
adjacent to the Denison Access ramps.
Immediately north of our focus area, industry remained the dominant feature along Ridge, Clinton,
Barberton and other streets near the rail lines. Adjacent to this industry laid Cleveland’s residential
neighborhoods. A mix of residential and commercial activity existed along Denison, Storer and Fulton
Avenues while the 1960’s saw the Denison-Ridge area and part of the former stockyards along West 65th
Street develop into strip-mall type shopping areas.
South of the valley, the city of Brooklyn and Cleveland’s Old Brooklyn neighborhood continued to build out
after World War II, primarily as bedroom communities with a mix of commercial activity concentrated
along Memphis, Fulton and Ridge Roads, including Biddulph Plaza at the corner of Biddulph and Ridge
Roads. Beginning in the late 1980’s Ridge Park Square, a large shopping center with about 50 stores was
developed further south along Ridge Road, just north of I-480. In 1993 the Ridge Road concrete arch bridge
across Big Creek, the railroad and I-71 was replaced with a steel girder bridge.
By the year 2000 community interest increased for a recreational trial connecting the Towpath Trial along
the Cuyahoga River with the Zoo and Brookside Reservation. In 2002, a comprehensive land use study was
completed for the lower Big Creek valley. In 2005 Friends of Big Creek was organized to support
recommendations of the study including the development of a greenway and trail through the valley, to
carry that vision westward through the city of Brooklyn, and to act as the stewardship organization for the
Big Creek watershed. (See Appendix J: Big Creek Connects Fact Sheet) Within the organization’s vision is to
see the trail run continuously from the Cuyahoga River and Towpath Trail through the Zoo, Brookside and
the City of Brooklyn to Brookpark Road and the Big Creek Reservation in Parma. The 6-1/2 mile corridor
will be accessible to over 24,000 residents within ½ mile and over 73,000 within 1 mile of its alignment. (See
Population Buffer Map in Appendix E)
In 2006 the Brooklyn Master Plan was completed. Among the plan’s recommendations was a connection
between the Cleveland Metroparks Big Creek and Brookside Reservations and improved access to I-71 for
the city’s industry north of the valley. In 2007 the Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan was completed. Among this
plan’s recommendations for the Stockyards neighborhood was the redevelopment of its commercial and
industrial areas.
Over the next several years, a series of other land use plans and studies impacting this study’s focus area
followed. (To learn more about each of these, see the Potential Alternatives section) An effort to address gaps
in these studies, beginning with environmental aspects led to the development of the Big Creek/I-71
Relocation & Restoration Initiative beginning in 2012. See Appendix A for a timeline of events related to the
area of study.
10 Big Creek / I-71

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Big Creek is considered an urban stream, as nearly 40% of its watershed contains impervious surfaces. The
Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan notes “Typical of many urban streams, Big Creek has been
subject to the effects of extensive urbanization for more than 150 years. Its original drainage patterns,
wetlands, floodplains and riparian areas have been severely altered and fragmented as a result of
channelization, spillway structures, culverts, and land uses encroaching on the stream. This has substantially
and permanently altered stream discharge rates and volumes, decreased diversity and livability of habitat
and limited the recovery potential of the stream.”
The Balanced Growth plan also notes that Big Creek is part of the Cuyahoga River Area of Concern (AOC)
and that “Big Creek is designated by Ohio EPA as a ‘Primary Contact’ and ‘Warm Water Habitat’ stream.
These designations mean that Big Creek should have bacteria concentrations within a reasonable limit to
allow safe recreational contact and be able to support a well balanced population of fish and aquatic insects.”
As the Big Creek watershed became more urbanized, downstream flooding and erosion has become an
increasing threat. Cleveland Metroparks has undertaken a number of studies to try to address concerns
about flooding in Brookside and the Zoo, as a large scale “50 year storm event” has not occurred since their
establishment. The City of Cleveland, NEORSD and ODOT share these concerns, particularly as it relates to
the erosion problem impacting the CSX rail line adjacent to the channelized section of Big Creek.
Despite these concerns, the Zoo and Brookside Reservation provide significant value to the surrounding
communities. This is especially so with the Old Brooklyn neighborhood immediately south of these sites.
The city of Brooklyn, to the west of the area, shares many of the same benefits. The Stockyards and other
neighborhoods to the north however, share somewhat less of these gains, due to limited and distant public
access points, and industrial land uses acting as barriers to the area (See existing land use maps, Figures 4 &
5).
Both cities realize the economic and social value that these industrial and commercial enterprises provide.
However, concerns exist about how to best serve the transportation needs of business to sustain and aid in
their growth while lessening truck traffic or other negative impacts to the surrounding residential areas.
Where I-71 terminates at Denison Avenue, truck traffic often causes congestion and poses safety issues. The
commercial corridor along Ridge Road between Denison and I-71, in contrast, lacks vitality, while heavy
truck traffic often traverses south through the city of Brooklyn en route to further destinations.
These and a number of other transportation, economic, environmental and social challenges exist that this
initiative seeks to address. In the following section of this study, problems within each of these areas of
concern are further defined. For a comparison of demographics between the City of Brooklyn and the City
of Cleveland’s Stockyards and Old Brooklyn neighborhoods, see Community Demographics in Appendix B.

Figure 4: Brooklyn Master Plan: Current Land Use Map (2006)
12 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 5: Stockyards Existing Land Use: Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan (2007)

DEFINING THE PROBLEMS
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
 Long distance between full interchanges along I-71: The distance is significant for an urbanized
metropolitan area: 3.6 miles between the Fulton Road and West 130th Street interchanges (See Figure
1). If the Fulton Road exit southbound on I-71 is missed, one must travel a minimum of 7.2 miles to
return to the exit. The distance between the interchanges limits highway access and forces unnecessary
traffic onto local road networks between these points.
 Limited access at existing interchange: I-71/Denison Access on/off ramp has limited access vs. a full
interchange (has northbound exit and southbound entrance only) Ramp is too close to Fulton Road
full interchange to be of significant value. Truck traffic at Denison ramp causes congestion and safety
concerns.
 Limited highway access for industry: Brooklyn Master Plan (2006) cites the need for better access to
I-71 along Ridge/Clinton Road industrial area (See Figure 7). The 2020 Citywide and other Cleveland
plans envision expanded commercial and industrial areas yet these areas lack convenient freeway
access.
 Limited highway access to/from Cleveland neighborhoods: Ridge Road/Denison Avenue area
neighborhoods lack full interstate access; must travel east to Fulton Road to reach I-71 north, or south
along Ridge Road to reach I-480 east.
 Limited highway access to/from Brooklyn neighborhoods: Commercial enterprises and residents
within city lack convenient access to I-71 north.
 Ridge Road receives significant traffic between I-480 and Biddulph Avenue including truck traffic
to/from the Ridge Road Transfer Station and other industrial enterprises north of I-71.
 Denison Avenue receives significant truck traffic en route to industry along Ridge Road, and West
56th, 58th and 65th Streets.
 Loss of vehicular access to Brookside Reservation for Cleveland residents since closing of John Nagy
Blvd entrance at Fulton Road and Denison Avenue.
 Ridge Road not suitable for bicycle use: Other opportunities for bicyclists or pedestrians to traverse
Big Creek valley west of Fulton Road are limited.
 Operational and Design Standard deficiencies along I-71: Northbound Denison exit ramp exits
from left of mainline. Denison Avenue entrance/exit at T-intersection is poor location design, has
safety issues and degrades the character of the neighborhood.
Denison Avenue at Access ramps looking west Denison Avenue Access ramps looking south
14 Big Creek / I-71

ECONOMIC
 Lack of highway access to markets for industrial and commercial enterprises along
Ridge/Denison/Clinton Road areas.
 High road maintenance costs due to heavy truck traffic on Denison Avenue and other light capacity
roads between distant full interchanges.
 Denison Access ramp area wastes public dollars in road and landscaping maintenance of over 30
acres; land that delivers little net economic gain
 Significant costs due to flooding and erosion damage and water quality degradation due to
channelization of creek
 Ongoing costs to maintain failing concrete channel of creek and buried sewer pipes en route to the
stream channel
 Lower residential property values, less incentive for re-investment and lack of households with
broader range of incomes for Stockyards and other neighborhoods north of area due, in part, to lack
of access to greenspace and other community assets (See Figure 6).
 Minimal incentives for attraction, retention and investments in office, retail, other commercial
enterprises near Brookside Reservation due in part to little identity with park system
 Undervalued property tax assessments for both cities considering locations adjacent to interstate
system and potential greenway
 Less income, sales tax income realized from businesses in area than could be realized
 Regional costs of urban sprawl due to lack of attractive urban development opportunities
Ridge Road near Denison Avenue looking south Corner of Denison Avenue & Ridge Road

Figure 6: Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan (2007)
16 Big Creek / I-71

ENVIRONMENTAL
 Excessive truck traffic through residential neighborhoods to/from distant freeway interchanges
creating noise and air pollution.
 Pressure for City of Brooklyn to court industrial development in wooded and wetland areas west
of Tiedeman Road due to proximity to interstate system via full interchange at I-480.
 Outdoor Police Firing Range in highly urbanized area creates noise disturbance, discharge
contamination.
 Large amount of impervious land area exists where the underutilized freeway ramps consume over
30 acres of land that contribute to degraded natural habitat and excessive stormwater run-off.
 Decreased ability of Big Creek to retain and infiltrate stream flow, particularly as watershed
becomes more urbanized, due to concrete channelization of stream (See drainage plans, Appendix C).
 Increased risk of downstream flooding and erosion: Concrete channel is increasing flow rate and
impacts to downstream areas, risking flooding and erosion, particularly within Brookside Reservation
and Zoo.
Channel looking east from Brooklyn Oxbow Flood waters entering triple culverts in Zoo
 Increased erosion within and adjacent to channel: Channel itself is experiencing increasing amount
of structural failure and erosion within bed and threatening adjacent property; e.g. CSX railroad bed.
 Degraded water quality: Channel degrades water quality due to its increased flow rate, temperature
variation, lack of natural structure/riparian buffer and loss of ability to perform bioremediation.
 Degraded aquatic habitat: Channel and drop structure, making up for elevation difference from loss
of natural meander, has severely reduced stream’s ability to support aquatic habitat.
 Degraded terrestrial habitat: Channelization of stream has reduced or in some sections eliminated
entirely a terrestrial corridor for native wildlife that had existed prior to its construction.
 Degraded water quality and excessive sediment delivered to Cuyahoga River and Lake Erie, as Big
Creek is the third largest tributary within the Cuyahoga River Area of Concern.
 Increase in impervious surfaces, contaminated stormwater run-off, air pollution and carbon
footprint due to urban sprawl.

Big Creek Drop Structure, Brookside Reservation, August 2013, showing CSX rail line and I-71 beyond.
SOCIAL / CULTURAL
 Little social/cultural connection or identity with park system for Stockyards and other
neighborhoods north of Brookside Reservation.
 Loss of convenient access to Brookside Reservation for residents living north of the park after
removal of vehicular access at Denison & Fulton Roads. (Pedestrian and bicycle access only)
 Lack of pedestrian/bicycle access to Brookside Reservation for Cleveland residents in
Stockyard/other neighborhoods further west of Fulton Road.
 Lack of connections to the Metroparks system beyond neighborhoods north or south of Brookside
Reservation and Memphis Picnic Area and the recreational, health and educational opportunities
those connections could offer.
 Communities beyond area lack same opportunities to connect to Metroparks system north of the
Big Creek Reservation in Parma, and westward from the Ohio & Erie Canal Reservation in Cleveland.
 Lack of space for additional recreational opportunities exists in Brookside Reservation.
 Cleveland Metroparks Zoo lacks space for potential westward expansion.
 Zoo has need for additional parking capacity, placing pressure to expand into Brookside Reservation
or other culturally or environmentally sensitive areas such as the lower Big Creek valley east of Pearl
Road.
18 Big Creek / I-71

 Gap in Big Creek (Brooklyn) Greenway Trail Alignment & Neighborhood Connector Plan exists as
it was forced to seek on-street alternatives in the city for Brookside and Memphis Picnic Area trail
linkages due to constricted space between freeway, railroad, channelized creek and steep slopes (See
Overall Master Plan in Appendix E).
 Freeway ramps and firing range areas are underutilized for such a highly populated area lacking
community assets.
 Public health issues exist due to volume of truck traffic through neighborhoods and the lack of access
to greenspace and recreational opportunities.
 Public safety issues continue to exist with Big Creek drop structure in Brookside Reservation.
Big Creek Drop Structure, Brookside Reservation

POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES
During this study, a number of existing land use proposals were examined and new ones generated to
address the problems cited above. For clarity, these were categorized in the general areas of transportation
infrastructure, economic and community development, watershed/stream restoration, recreational space,
and neighborhood connections. A summary of each proposal is given followed by an assessment of their
feasibility. The proposals are then further examined in combination with each other in the development of
several conceptual plans for the focus area.
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
 Explore Improved Ridge Road Industrial Area Connection to existing Denison Access Interchange
per Brooklyn Master Plan. The plan states: “A precondition of redeveloping this large site as an
industrial park is to improve access to I-71. The closest on-ramp to Interstate 71 is from Denison Avenue
by Fulton Road. One concept considers utilizing a portion of the rail line just east of Ridge Road through
the Stockyards to connect to I-71” (See Figures 7 & 9). In addition to considering the issues involved in
abandoning an active rail line (Norfolk Southern), this proposal may be costly vs. the limited benefit it
may provide utilizing a partial interchange at Denison Ave.
 Remove industrial uses along Barberton Avenue, create park space in its place and create a
connector road into the Ridge Road retail area as proposed in the Re-envisioning the Stockyard
Neighborhood study (See Figure 8). These residential vs. industrial land use changes will need to be re-
examined when considering opportunities Concept Plans A, B or C could create. The retention of the
existing industry along Barberton should be examined and include the economic development
potential of the Norfolk Southern rail line.
 Increase Interchange Connectivity to proposed Tradex Parkway Industrial Area. The Re-
envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study also sought to better address connectivity problems
east of the freeway ramp system by building a new access road along the ridge of the north oxbow,
creating opportunities for business expansion and connecting the road directly with the ramp system
(See Figure 8). Although promising, neither the Stockyards study, nor the Cleveland 2020 Citywide
Plan considers the limited incentives for industry using the existing partial interchange vs. a full
interchange. The access road idea should be further explored however, for its potential to create a
more direct connection to Ridge Road if a full interchange were built there. (See Concept Plans C-1, 2
& 3 below)
 Re-align W. 67th Street south of Storer Avenue to provide improved linkage with Denison Avenue as
proposed in W. 65th Street Corridor Study (See Figure 11). This proposal has benefits independent of
other alternatives and should be re-examined in combination with others alternatives.
 Extend Storer to Denison Avenue as proposed in the Re-envisioning the Stockyards study. This is
another proposal worth further consideration.
 Re-configure Denison Access Ramps. This option proposes examining the elimination of the
southbound access ramp and sharing south and northbound traffic on the northbound ramp, thus
freeing up land in the valley for other uses. This option may be costly considering the relatively limited
gain in land acreage.
20 Big Creek / I-71

 Full Interchange at Ridge Road. Examine build only, without modifying/removing Denison Access
ramps. This option may provide economic development potential, particularly for enhancing the
industrial corridor to the north. But without the removal of the Denison Access ramps, the stream
relocation and expanded recreational space, it provides little opportunity for environmental,
economic, social or other quality of life benefits to the residential neighborhoods.
 Examine Planned Highway Infrastructure Changes in ODOT Capital Plan. As of December 2014
no planned changes have been identified by ODOT for this area. However, long term needs for the
aging infrastructure should be considered and incorporated into any planning for the area including
the timeline for a Ridge Road bridge repairs or reconstruction.
I-71 / Denison Exit Ramp looking west towards I-71 looking east from Ridge Road bridge
Ridge Road bridge
 Denison Access Removal without Alternative Interchange: See Concept Plan A

 Denison Access Removal with New Interchange at Ridge Road: See Concept Plan B
 Denison Access Removal with New Interchange at Ridge Road and New Industrial Access Road:
See Concept Plans C-1, 2 & 3

Figure 7: Brooklyn Master Plan: Citywide Plan (2006)
22 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 8: Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study: Treatment Diagram (2007)

ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Numerous strategies exist for economic & community development within the study area, as noted in
several plans and studies. Among those examined include:
 Brooklyn Master Plan (2006). The plan identifies a number of economic development strategies
including preserving and enhancing the city’s non-residential tax base; improving the visual aesthetics
of the commercial streetscape; and pursuing selective redevelopment opportunities. Additional
policies for specific locations are identified. Two locations adjacent to our focus area are discussed
here:
o Clinton Road Focus Area (See Figure 9). The plan recommends designating and marketing the
area as a formal industrial park and improving truck access to the area so that trucks are not
disruptive to surrounding areas. It recommends coordinating with the Stockyards Neighborhood
study to explore a connection to the Denison ramps along the NS railroad right-of-way. However,
as noted under Transportation Infrastructure above, our study recommends giving serious
consideration to seeking the abandonment of an active rail line. In addition, access to the existing
partial interchange at Denison would provide limited economic gain vs. a full interchange at Ridge
Road. The economic development potential for this area, including along Ridge Road in both
cities, could prove significant if a full interchange at Ridge Road were realized.
o Brooklyn City Center. The Brooklyn Master Plan recommends creating a focal point for the city
in a mixed-use “City Center” along Memphis Avenue where concentrations of civic uses currently
exist. The plan wisely recommends complementary and integrated land uses within the focus area,
including additional housing. However, housing should not be placed adjacent to riparian areas,
as a couple examples in the plan suggests. The plan also encourages infill retail/office development
along Ridge Road near Memphis Avenue (See Figure 7). This strategy as well is worth pursuing.
Figure 9: Brooklyn Master Plan: Conceptual Overview, Clinton Road Focus Area 1 (2006)
24 Big Creek / I-71
o Other development policy areas include housing/neighborhood; community character and
identity; and community facilities. The plan recommends providing safe travel environments in
residential areas by creating linkages with existing bike/trail systems to create a regional approach
to a connected system. Community survey results indicated that residents have a desire to
preserve remaining areas of open space. The plan recommends encouraging property owners to
consider conservation easements on those portions of their properties that are key natural areas
and recommends the city adopt a riparian setback regulation to preserve and enhance Big Creek.
 Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan – Stockyard Neighborhood (2007). The plan recommends
redeveloping infill properties for light industrial uses along Barberton Avenue and east of West 67th
Street, between Denison and Storer Avenue. It recommends redeveloping the east side of W. 65th
north of Storer as a contemporary light industrial park and establishing a consolidated retail district
along the west side of the street. It recommends establishing a Business Revitalization District within
the area to ensure appropriate design of buildings, signage and property. For the Denison-Ridge area,
the plan recommended the redevelopment of existing retail properties into new light industrial
development. Later, this strategy was re-considered. In order to ensure that the area remains a viable
residential neighborhood, the plan recommends these and other significant redevelopment efforts are
undertaken. Other recommendations include the creation of park and playground facilities located
adjacent to densely developed residential areas, and creating a strong north-south connection along
West 65th Street with improved landscaping and bike lanes.
 Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood Study (2007). This study makes many of the same
recommendations noted in the 2020 Citywide Plan for the West 65th Street area (See Figure 8). It
recommends renovating existing retail on Denison and encouraging infill development compatible
with existing buildings. However, it inappropriately suggests park space in areas where viable
businesses exist, and recommends relocating industrial uses on Barberton Avenue and creating a park
there, while establishing a trail along the NS railroad right-of-way. As noted previously, our study
finds that the economic potential of the active railroad should be considered more seriously before
recommending the abandonment of an active rail line. Another factor to consider however are
potential traffic impacts with increased train travel at the Ridge Road rail crossing. Also noted
elsewhere in our study, the Stockyard study’s Tradex Parkway proposal recommending a Ridge Road
Industrial Access Road could provide significant economic development opportunities with a full
interchange at Ridge Road.
 W. 65th Street Corridor Plan (2013). The plan seeks to improve the range of transportation choices,
enhance economic viability and community identity. It recommends excellent intersection and
streetscape improvements with on and off-road bike facilities along West 65th Street (See Figure 10). A
market analysis for the Southern Industrial Area, along West 65th between Clark and Denison
Avenues, found that retail is not supported in the area and recommends redeveloping the area into
light industrial (See Figure 11). Our study does not make any land use recommendations for this area
but does recommend that, as the concept plans in the Big Creek/I-71 study move forward, an updated
master plan for the entire Stockyards neighborhood be considered.
 Concept Plans A, B & C-1, 2 & 3. The concept plans in this study could provide significant
opportunities in both cities for retention, attraction and investment in the commercial and industrial
markets, explained in more detail under each plan description. Among the greatest community assets
for neighborhoods in both communities north and south of the Big Creek/I-71 corridor is the
Cleveland Metroparks’ Brookside and Big Creek Reservations. Expanding and connecting these parks
to each other and enhancing their connectivity to the adjacent communities, particularly to the north,
could improve the marketability and quality of life within those communities. To better assess

development opportunities with the concept plans, the Big Creek/I-71 study recommends the
undertaking of broad ranged marketing and economic impact studies jointly by both cities.
Figure 10: W. 65th Street Corridor Plan: Separated all-purpose trail
Figure 11: W. 65th Street Corridor Plan: Southern Industrial Area
WATERSHED/STREAM RESTORATION
Following are several areas explored in recent years for opportunities to help restore watershed function:
 Conservation and restoration in Priority Conservation Areas and redevelopment in Priority

Development Areas identified in the Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan. This “smart
growth” watershed plan was adopted by the five primary Big Creek watershed communities including
26 Big Creek / I-71
the cities of Cleveland and Brooklyn in 2010 and was endorsed by the Ohio Lake Erie Commission in
2011. PCA’s are locations where land use change is predicted to have a high impact in the watershed
in terms of flooding, erosion, and water quality. PDA’s are locations where land use changes are
predicted to have minimal impact on the watershed and where conditions suggest that additional
development may be appropriate (See Figure 12).
Figure 12: Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan (2010) – Priority Conservation Areas (outlined in
red) and Priority Development Areas (dark gray areas) within this study’s Focus Area. The northern edge
of the Big Creek watershed boundary (black line) runs along Denison Avenue.
 Stormwater Retrofits along I-71/Denison Avenue Access land areas. These areas take up over 30
acres of land that contribute to excessive stormwater run-off. The Big Creek Watershed Balanced
Growth Plan identified Storage at Highway Interchanges as one of several stormwater retrofit areas
best suited to restore watershed function in urbanized areas. “Highways often contain open and
under-utilized land within their right-of-way where stormwater storage can be obtained by diverting
highway runoff into these areas. The most common stormwater treatment options for highway
retrofits are constructed wetlands or linear bioretention and swales along wider medians and rights-of
way.” The plan identified the I-71 & Denison Access area as the largest of 6 highway areas within the
38 square mile watershed, and among the best candidate for retrofit practices (See Figure 13).

Figure 13: Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan – from p. 74: Storage at Highway Interchanges
 Wetland Enhancement/Expansion or Stream Diversion into Brooklyn Oxbow (See PCA #63 in
figure 12). During the Balanced Growth and Greenway planning processes, Big Creek Connects
examined the feasibility of routing the stream, or part of its flow, into this Priority Conservation Area.
Greenway Plan consultants noted the value in the existing wetland area within the Oxbow. The
volume of contaminated fill dirt in the western part of the oxbow area was found to be significant. The
wetland area in eastern section could be enhanced and its storage capacity from storm sewer outfalls
could be increased. The stream could also be allowed to continue working its way into Oxbow area,
creating additional storage from upstream flow. In development of alternatives in this study, BCC
found little gain in directing the entire stream into Oxbow area due to constraints in topography and
the fact that it would still need to exit into the concrete channel. If the stream was to be relocated out
of the channel upstream from the Oxbow however, the area could still be used for overflow storage, as
it is now, via a control structure and storm drainage placed along the base of the channel.
28 Big Creek / I-71

 Stream Restoration along Big Creek above and below drop structure in Brookside Reservation.
Public, nonprofit and private consultants met in 2008 to discuss stream restoration alternatives below
the drop structure. The team examined building up the stream elevation downstream and the
rerouting of the stream into the south oxbow. In October 2012 BCC re-examined restoration
alternatives for the drop structure with NEORSD and Cuyahoga SWCD specialists. These included
cutting the streambed back from the drop structure and adding floodplain between the drop structure
and Ridge Road. It was determined that build-up of the creek downstream would require more land
than presently available to be effective. The channel cut-back could be explored further but may be
questionable when considering cost/benefit analysis. Additional studies have been undertaken by
Cleveland Metroparks and others to address flooding and erosion (See References). A recent attempt
to shore up the right bank below the drop structure has not been successful due to the velocity of the
stream flow. Until a long term solution can be found, the left bank below the drop structure may need
to be temporarily re-armored to prevent further erosion below the railroad bed.
 Stream Diversion into Brookside South Oxbow. There may be a desire to further explore routing the
creek into the former streambed south of the existing ball diamonds in Brookside Reservation as part
of the concepts developed in this document to add stream length, lessen stream gradient & add storage
capacity. Preliminary cost/benefit analysis however, finds a low return in environmental benefit versus
additional costs in construction, maintenance, and potential loss of land for other beneficial uses
including potential Zoo expansion needs.
 Storage in Cleveland North Oxbow (Cleveland Police Firing Range area). If not modified to accept
the creek’s relocation, this oxbow could act as a flood water storage area for sewer outfalls from Ridge
Road north of the valley by intercepting them before continuing on to Big Creek (one via an outfall
above drop structure and one immediately below it) For any alternative uses, it will need to be
determined whether the city is willing to consider relocating the firing range. Recent conversations
with Cleveland Police personnel have revealed that there has been interest in an indoor firing range
somewhere in place of the existing outdoor site. The concept plans in this study envision the
relocation of the creek along the perimeter of this area with recreational use within. However, a larger
part of the area could instead be used as floodplain or wetland to increase storage capacity. Also to
note for any alternative uses, is that environmental cleanup costs from long term firing range
discharges may prove challenging.
 Routing Creek into North Oxbow without removing access ramps or relocating southbound
highway lanes, and enabling stream to re-enter below the drop structure. This alternative would
remove the stream from the concrete channel and eliminate many of its related problems. It may be
possible to engineer if there is enough room between the southbound lanes and the slope to the north
or by moving the lanes southward slightly. It may still require the relocation of the police firing range,
however. The access ramps would need to be modified to allow the creek to pass under. And, two sets
of highway and railroad bridges would need to be constructed. Considering the financial costs
involved without enabling the expansion of and increased connections to the park system, and the
related economic and community impacts identified in Concept Plans A, B or C below, this alternative
does not seem feasible.
 Routing Creek into North Oxbow by removing access ramps, relocating southbound highway lanes
and re-entering stream below drop structure: See Concept Plans A, B & C.
 Implement Stormwater Control Measures throughout the Big Creek watershed. SCMs, both
structural and nonstructural, will need to increase in order to reduce pollutant loads, moderate the
variation and intensity of flow regimes, and maintain aquatic habitat in the stream channel.

Cleveland Police Firing Range - North Oxbow area, looking northwest
RECREATIONAL SPACE
 Support the Cleveland Metroparks 2020 Plan. The plan examines existing conditions and lists
recommendations for improvement for the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations. The Brookside
Reservation/Cleveland Metroparks Zoo Concept Plan seeks to “Enhance and integrate roles as a local
community open space and a regional destination; increase connectivity to Big Creek and Ohio & Erie
Canal [Reservations]” The plan recognizes and supports the implementation of the Lower Big Creek
and Brooklyn Greenway Plans as well as stormwater management practices beyond the park system.
(See Appendix F)
 Explore options that provide new opportunities to address park system’s challenges. The cities and
other stakeholders could help Cleveland Metroparks better address flooding, erosion and site
constraint challenges in the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations and the Zoo by exploring
alternative stream restoration practices and land uses suggested in this document including concept
plans A, B and C. These include opening up over 50 acres of underutilized land north of I-71 to public
use with the potential of expanding or re-locating Brookside Reservation facilities into the area.
NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIONS
 Support the Implementation of the Lower Big Creek Greenway Redevelopment and Restoration
Plan. The 2008 plan is a comprehensive master plan and land use strategy for the Lower Big Creek
Valley Greenway. Project partners are focusing efforts on land reuse and trail connections between
Pearl Road and Jennings Avenue (See Overall Map in Appendix E) In addition to the trail alignments
proposed in this study for Brookside Reservation, a re-examination of a trail east of Brookside
between the Zoo and the CSX railroad should be considered, keeping the main trail along the valley
floor.
30 Big Creek / I-71

 Support the Implementation of the Big Creek (Brooklyn) Greenway Trail Alignment & Neighbor-
hood Connector Plan. This plan, completed in 2009, builds on the work of the Lower Big Creek plan
by creating a continuous greenway and trail system linking the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations
through the city of Brooklyn and enhancing connections to the surrounding neighborhoods. (See
Overall Master Plan in Appendix E)
 Address Gaps in Connections between both Plans and to adjacent Neighborhoods. Significant
challenges exist in making connections from neighborhoods north of Brookside Reservation west of
Fulton Road. And, due to sections of steep topography along the stream’s corridor and its proximity
to a railroad line, the Brooklyn Greenway plan was forced to utilize the street network within the city
to make connections between the Brookside and Big Creek Reservations. Options for addressing these
challenges are limited without considering significant changes to the infrastructure that bisects the
valley. The concept plans in this study seek to address these challenges.
Big Creek corridor looking west from Ridge Road showing steep slope on left and CSX railroad on right


COMBINED TRANSPORTATION, DEVELOPMENT, RESTORATION, RECREATION AND
NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTION OPPORTUNITIES
CONCEPT PLANS A, B & C-1, 2 & 3
The Denison Avenue access ramp and over one mile of concrete channel of the creek would not have been
constructed if the proposed “Parma Freeway” running north/south through the area was not planned for
several decades ago (See Figure 3). The freeway never materialized, thus the ramp's continued existence is
hard to justify when looking at opportunities its removal could present (See Figure 14: Existing Conditions).
The concept plans in this document propose the decommissioning and removal of the multi-lane ramps and
relocating the freeway’s southbound lanes adjacent to its northbound lanes. Combined with relocating the
police firing range, over 50 acres of underutilized land could be opened up to potential environmental
remediation and recreational use. (See concept plans below)
Each concept plan proposes constructing two sets of short bridges to allow Big Creek to leave its one mile
plus concrete channel and meander north under the railroad and highway into its original stream bed. The
stream would then bridge back under the freeway and railroad and re-connect with its existing stream bed in
Brookside Reservation, just down-stream from the existing 26' high drop structure.
Concept Plan A envisions the removal of most of the Denison Avenue Access Ramps without a new
interchange at an alternative location (See Figure 15). Concept Plans B & C add a new interchange at Ridge
Road. Due to the amount of fill dirt in the area, creating additional floodplain or wetland area could be
problematic. The fill material was created during I-71’s construction as the land area above the stream’s
meander was cut and leveled. The concept plans envision:
 Land usage:
o 10 acres stream/floodplain/wetlands (not including Brooklyn Oxbow area)
o 25 acres recreational space
o 3 acres parking (+-300 cars)
o 12 acres roadways/fill area
 Stream length:
o Existing concrete channel portion of creek = 5800 lf.
o New alignment will bypass drop structure, naturalize the stream and add 2093 linear feet
(36%) to its length
 Stream gradient:
o Existing concrete channel: 35 ft per 5800 lf = 0.60%
o New alignment: 60 ft per 7893 lf = 0.76%
The abandonment of the armored channel of Big Creek would address a number of erosion, flooding and
water quality problems for the stream. In addition, it could realize early 20th century plans linking the
Brookside and Big Creek Reservations by placing storm pipe along the bottom of the abandoned channel to
accept outfalls and run-off along its length, adding fill material, and locating a greenway and all-purpose
trail above. Public access to the Cleveland Metroparks could be opened up to numerous Cleveland residents
with a new city park or Brookside Reservation entrance at Denison Avenue by modifying part of the
abandoned freeway ramp with a roadway and all-purpose trail leading into the valley. A neighborhood
connector trail to the West Boulevard neighborhood could also be realized. A relocated and naturalized
stream could re-create a wildlife corridor, support aquatic habitat and allow fish passage upstream from
32 Big Creek / I-71

Brookside Reservation into the Big Creek Reservation in Parma/Parma Heights and other areas. Numerous
opportunities for interpretive signage would exist for the natural landscape, the surrounding communities
and industry in the area. The concept plans envision:
 New all-purpose trails: over 5 miles

 New access roads/parkway: 1.5 miles
Taken together, these changes could significantly alter the neighborhood character, housing value and
quality of life in the Stockyards and adjacent neighborhoods. These changes could in turn have a positive
effect on neighborhoods south of the valley including Cleveland’s Old Brooklyn neighborhood and
neighborhoods in the city of Brooklyn. Additionally, new opportunities for westward expansion could open
up for Cleveland Metroparks Zoo.
A primary question to address if further study moves forward, is if an alternative like Concept Plan
A would have economic, community and environmental benefits over costs without a new
interchange in an alternative location. The loss of the Denison Access Interchange without a
viable alternative could have significant negative impacts for industrial and commercial
enterprises in the area.

Figure 14: Existing Conditions
34 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 15: Concept Plan A

CONCEPT PLAN B
In addition to the features contained in concept Plan A, Concept Plan B envisions a full interchange at Ridge
Road (See Figure 16). An interchange at this location would provide a break in the 3.6 mile I-71 highway
corridor that exists in this highly urbanized area. It could help address issues related to urban sprawl and
redirect investment and employment into this urban core.
A full interchange at Ridge Road could offer significant opportunities in economic development, as both
cities are interested in enhancing or expanding light industry in the Clinton/Ridge/Denison areas, north of
the potential interchange. For both cities, industrial land use and traffic could be concentrated along these
and adjacent streets as envisioned in various Cleveland and Brooklyn plans. A full interchange there could
direct industrial activities away from residential neighborhoods and environmentally sensitive areas in both
cities.
The interchange could also divert truck traffic from using Ridge Road to reach I-480 by instead using I-71
south to reach I-480 west, or using I-71 north to I-176 south to reach I-480 east. Using these alternate routes
would be to the advantage of truck drivers by eliminating traffic stops en route to reaching these
destinations (See Figure 1: Study and Focus Areas map).
An access road from Barberton Avenue westward should be re-explored, connecting its industry towards
Ridge Road, diverting truck traffic away from the residential areas and more directly to the new interchange.
First however, the desire for industrial development vs. park space along the Norfolk Southern rail line
running parallel to Barberton Avenue should be determined. A new access road from Tradex Parkway to
Ridge Road also proposed in the Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study should also be re-
examined. Further details about these options are discussed under Potential Alternatives to Transportation
Infrastructure and in the C concept descriptions below.
The West 65th Street Corridor Plan recommended re-developing the abandoned buildings and existing retail
along West 65th and West 67th Streets between Clark and Denison Avenues into light industrial (See Figure
11). The plan also recommended a realigned West 67th Street to Denison Avenue. This alignment should be
further explored as should continuing this, or another alignment south of Denison Avenue to meet with a
Barberton Avenue access road, if it were to be realized. An extension of Storer Avenue further westward,
connecting more directly with Ridge Road should also be re-examined.
South of the interchange, opportunities exist to strengthen the retail and commercial markets along both
Ridge Road and Memphis Avenue in both cities.
Through a combination of these changes, Ridge Road, Denison and Memphis Avenues and other streets
could more easily be developed into compact, mixed use, pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly “complete
and green streets”.
Concept Plan B is a sustainable, livable and smart growth approach to community design. It has the
potential to address a number of transportation, economic, community and environmental challenges that
would be difficult to address using any number of other existing or proposed plans alone or in combination.
Perhaps the largest question to be addressed in considering a full interchange at Ridge

Road, whether as part of Concept Plan B or as part of other alternatives, would be if any
negative impacts, such as an increase in traffic volume, were worth any gains in economic,
social or environmental benefits. Not knowing those potential impacts for certain however,
may help justify the need for further study.
36 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 16: Concept Plan B

CONCEPT PLANS C-1, 2 & 3
In addition to the features contained in concept Plan A, and a full interchange at Ridge Road proposed in
concept B, the three C concepts envision an industrial/commercial connector road from West 58th Street to
Ridge Road. Although a full interchange may be more favorable than a partial interchange, concerns were
raised that the loss of the I-71 Denison Access may cause a burden to industrial and commercial activity
currently dependent on it.
The additional distance to reach a new interchange at Ridge Road via Denison Avenue for southbound
travel could be significant for industry located in the Denison Access area. Additional truck traffic on
Denison would be undesirable, as would the extra traffic lights trucks would have to contend with.
Therefore, various options for more direct access to a full interchange at Ridge Road were explored. Among
those explored were ways in which to connect West 58th to Barberton Avenue and Barberton to Ridge Road.
The most favorable option however, is based on an access road originally proposed in the Re-envisioning the
Stockyard Neighborhood study noted earlier. In addition to improving access, this “industrial parkway”
could act as a catalyst for additional industrial land use development.
The road would traverse along the ridge above the north oxbow from West 58th Street to the Ridge Road
[Waste] Transfer Station. The road network within the Transfer Station property would be modified to
share traffic with this new roadway. Three options are proposed that then connect this roadway with West
58th and West 56th streets.
Concept Plan C-1 proposes to make the connection to the new industrial access road with West 58th Street
only. It assumes that traffic from West 56th Street will use Denison Avenue to reach West 58th Street and the
new industrial access road (See Figure 17). Although this is the least costly solution, this concept would
continue to force truck traffic from West 56th Street onto Denison Avenue.
Concept Plan C-2 proposes that West 56th Street be extended south, then across the modified access ramp,
where the grades are level with each other, to connect with West 58th Street and the new industrial access
road (See Figure 18). This option was proposed in the Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study. It
would reduce truck traffic from having to traverse Denison Avenue to reach West 58th. However, crossing
the access ramp at grade, mixing truck traffic with the road and recreational trail leading into the valley, may
be undesirable.
Concept Plan C-3 proposes re-building the Denison Access bridge over the Norfolk-Southern Railroad to
accommodate an extension of Tradex Parkway, connecting West 56th Street with West 58th Street (See Figure
19). Although the most costly alternative, this option would provide a direct connection between these
streets while maintaining a grade separation between industry and recreational users. Following the Tradex
Parkway alignment, south of the NS rail line would allow ingress and egress from businesses there that are
currently cut off by any train traffic.
The industrial access road should be considered as a first step in a phasing strategy for any of the concepts, if
ultimately implemented. To minimize impacts to those dependent on the Denison Access ramps, the full
interchange should be built next, followed by the decommissioning of the ramps.
Finally, considering its potential economic impact and its improvement in access to the area, the industrial
access road should be considered for construction based on its own merits, whether or not any of the other
concepts are ever realized.
38 Big Creek / I-71

West 58th Street looking south. Denison Access ramp is on the left.
Denison Access ramp over NS railway, looking west. Tradex Parkway is to the left.

40 Big Creek / I-71


42 Big Creek / I-71

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
After weighing the potential alternatives, the following considerations and factors were taken into account
that shaped the stream, highway, road, trail alignment and land uses chosen in the concept plans.
STREAM ALIGNMENT:
The stream’s alignment prior to I-71’s construction was examined so as to mimic the natural topography in
the proposed alignment. Due to the number of crossings under the existing freeway and railroad alignments
that would result by following the entire historic alignment, a route was designed that would follow as much
of this alignment as possible with minimal crossings. (See 1937 vs. 2006 Stream/Highway Alignments in
Appendix G)
Near the upstream end of the concrete channel the concept plans propose diverting the stream along its
historic alignment, crossing under the railroad and freeway to the north. After making the crossing, for the
next 2000 feet or more the stream would follow a small percentage of its historic alignment, where it had
traversed north and south five times before entering the “north oxbow” area where the Cleveland Police
Firing Range currently exists. From approximately halfway between the Ridge Road bridge and the
beginning of the north oxbow, through the remainder of the proposed alignment, the stream follows most of
its historic alignment. Only at its crossing under I-71 and the railroad does it align slightly to the west. This
deviation is due to the need to construct the highway bridges further westward without impeding the
operation of the existing freeway lanes.
After examining historic topographic maps, it was estimated that ¼ of the proposed channel alignment
would consist of shale vs. softer earth or fill material that was deposited during I-71’s construction. Cost
differences in excavation for these differing materials were later calculated with shale removal ranging
between three to four times the cost of loose fill or soil removal. Most of the elevations noted along the
proposed stream alignment downstream from Ridge Road are close to the existing numbers. The concept
plans depict floodplain and wetlands adjacent to the stream along much of its length. However, the cost
estimates do not figure for the extra soil or shale removal, if they were to be constructed.
As noted earlier in this study, the concept plans propose installing storm sewer pipe in the abandoned
concrete lined stream channel to accept stormwater outfalls and surface runoff along its length before filling
and placing an all purpose trail above. Alternative designs were considered such as leaving the channel open
with a narrower stream width. However, due to the depth variation to adjacent land uses, such a channel
would be extremely steep sloped, pose another set of maintenance and erosion issues and limit space for
public access. Opening the channel just prior to the drop structure was also considered. Again, maintenance,
public access and perhaps more importantly, safety issues weighed heavily towards it remaining culverted.
As a trade-off, a fully restored, naturalized stream with fish passage and public access along its length can be
realized.
HIGHWAY/RAILROAD ALIGNMENTS:
With the removal of the Denison Access ramps, the southbound highway alignment is placed adjacent to the
northbound lanes, streamlining the system, saving maintenance costs and opening up underutilized land for
other purposes. Two pairs of bridges are proposed where the stream passes under the north and southbound
lanes. After excavating for the new stream alignment, it is assumed bridges would be built for the
southbound lanes adjacent to the northbound lanes. Here, northbound traffic would be diverted while
excavation continues and two bridges for the northbound lanes are built. The railroad would also assume a
temporary alignment north of its existing alignment while excavating and building its pair of bridges.

The concept plans propose leaving much of the Denison Access ramps in place and utilizing the southbound
highway entrance for a new roadway and trail network into the valley. Utilizing West 58th Street for access
into the valley was also considered, as it is currently used to access the Cleveland Police Firing Range.
However, several factors were considered that weighed in favor of using the highway access ramp instead.
First, access into the area using West 58th would require crossing the NS Railroad at-grade, interfering with
commercial traffic and posing safety issues for the public. Second, leaving most of the access ramps in place
eliminates the need for extra costs in earth removal where the ramps were built above the surrounding land.
Finally, this land area could help define and bring in closer to the neighborhood the new greenway and park
system. From Denison Avenue south to the new stream alignment this 1500’ “High Line” could offer a
commanding view of the surrounding industry and, at its southern end, a scenic overlook before descending
into the valley.
The Ridge Road interchange proposed in the B and C concepts is a tight diamond interchange, minimizing
the amount of land needed for its footprint. Cost estimates were calculated building a new Ridge Road
bridge, however cost savings in the modification of the existing bridge could be further considered as study
progresses. During the development process of this study and concept plans, ongoing discussions and
meetings occurred with ODOT representatives to examine various aspects of the proposals. Although initial
discussions with CSX and NS railroad representatives were made, these representatives did not follow up
with any comments after they received study and concept plan drafts. They did provide contact information
however, should planning progress further.
ROADWAYS:
The road network for each concept was designed with the goal of providing access into the valley from
Denison Avenue and connecting with John Nagy Boulevard in Brookside Reservation. As noted, the
southbound entrance ramp from Denison Avenue is proposed to be used for the roadway to and from the
valley. An all purpose trail is proposed adjacent to it. The bridges along I-71 and the CSX railroad were
conceived to allow space below them for both a road and trail in addition to the stream.
Where the road and trail enter the existing Brookside Reservation, just downstream from the drop structure,
the elevation difference from under the bridges to the existing grade proposes that John Nagy Boulevard be
relocated further south to allow for a gradual ascent. This may require that the existing maintenance
facilities owned by the city of Cleveland may need to be relocated, as they would lie within the proposed
road re-alignment.
The C concepts show three alternatives to providing improved east-west industrial access to a full
interchange at Ridge Road. All three envision an access road connecting with a modified road network in the
City of Cleveland’s Ridge Road Transfer Station. The proposed road extension would traverse across the
southern edge of an industrial property to reach West 58th Street. Although this proposal was discussed with,
and a study draft and concept plans were given to the property owner, to date no feedback has been received.
If a property transfer or easement cannot be negotiated along this parcel, alternative alignments north of the
property should be further explored. Further design considerations about each C concept are discussed
under their descriptions above.
44 Big Creek / I-71

Brookside Entrance at Ridge Road. Similar Brookside looking east from drop structure
treatment is proposed for the Denison Access ramp. area with proposed trail alignment to the right
RECREATIONAL TRAILS:
Broadly speaking, the trail network proposed in these concept plans reflect alignments proposed in earlier
studies. (See Appendix E: Greenway/Trail Plans) This study did not attempt to provide great detail about
trail locations so early in the planning process. But allowing continuous access along the proposed stream
alignment, joining the two Metroparks Reservations in the most direct manner and providing connections
to the surrounding neighborhoods should be priorities. It is recommended that the trails serve as multi-
purpose trails and be ADA accessible. Similar to Cleveland Metroparks’ existing design standards, they
should be a minimum of 10 feet in width and able to support emergency vehicles.
OTHER LAND USES:

As noted earlier, the concept plans envision the existing ball diamonds in Brookside Reservation to be
relocated into the north oxbow. Likewise, the current event site is proposed to be relocated just north of I-
71, where the access road into the valley makes a large loop. The concept plans do not suggest specific land
uses west of the proposed event site, as it could be used for additional recreational space, re-forested, built as
a wetland area, or used for other purposes. Except adjacent to the re-located ball diamonds, parking
locations were not identified in the concept plans. It should be noted that these land uses are suggestions
only, and that a thorough planning process with public input will need to be performed before any land use
designations; highway, bridge, road and trail alignments; or other design elements are ultimately decided
(See graphic renderings: Figures 20-23). Most of the properties where land use changes are proposed are
publicly owned. Only a few commercial properties may be directly impacted, while no residential properties
would be.

Figure 20: Southwest Aerial rendering –Existing
46 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 21: Southwest Aerial rendering – Concept Plan B

Figure 22: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Existing
48 Big Creek / I-71

Figure 23: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Proposed

COST ESTIMATES
Big Creek Connects estimated land, stream, highway, roadway and trail data based on the conceptual
designs that it developed. These figures were further defined and cost estimates were calculated by one of the
private consulting firms providing pro-bono services for this study. The firm requested to remain
anonymous for this service so as not to jeopardize their eligibility to bid on future phases of study. The costs
were calculated using the Ohio Department of Transportation’s Procedure for Budget Estimating - May 2013.
A contingency of 30% was figured into the costs. However, the calculations do not consider potential land
acquisition, environmental remediation, wetland construction, facility re-location or landscaping costs. The
total budget for each concept ranges from $83,130,000 for Concept A to $115,900,000 for Concept C-3.
Table 1 lists a summary of costs for each concept plan. For detailed calculations of costs for Concept C-3, see
Appendix H.
Concept Plan: A B C-1 C-2 C-3
Stream Relocation: 12,600,000 12,600,000 12,600,000 12,600,000 12,600,000
I-71/Denison/Ridge
Reconstruction:
Removals: 1,540,000 2,540,000 2,540,000 2,540,000 2,540,000
I-71 Reconstruction: 9,640,000 9,640,000 9,640,000 9,640,000 9,640,000
Bridges: 21,250,000 21,250,000 21,250,000 21,250,000 24,920,000
I-71/Ridge Interchange: 15,500,000 15,500,000 15,500,000 15,500,000
Access Drives: 835,000 835,000 1,241,000 1,245,000 1,335,000
Fill Existing Stream Channel: 3,915,000 3,915,000 3,915,000 3,915,000 3,915,000
All Trails: 2,550,000 2,550,000 2,550,000 2,550,000 2,550,000
Subtotal: 52,330,000 68,830,000 69,236,000 69,240,000 73,000,000
Contingency (30%): 15,700,000 20,650,000 20,700,000 20,780,000 21,900,000
Subtotal: 68,030,000 89,480,000 89,936,000 90,020,000 94,900,000
Planning, Environmental, and

10,300,000 13,500,000 13,500,000 13,600,000 14,300,000
Engineering (15%):
Construction Admin and

4,800,000 6,300,000 6,300,000 6,400,000 6,700,000
Inspection (7%):
Total Budget: 83,130,000 109,280,000 109,736,000 110,020,000 115,900,000
Table 1: Summary of Costs
50 Big Creek / I-71

NEXT STEPS & RECOMMENDATIONS
ESTABLISHING PARTNERSHIPS/COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Big Creek Connects, through the development and implementation of the Big Creek Watershed Balanced
Growth Plan and the Big Creek Greenway Plans, has taken the lead in the Big Creek/I-71 Initiative by
engaging stakeholders, gathering data, defining the problems and developing potential alternatives. This first
phase of study is scheduled for completion by March 31, 2015.
It had been determined that, upon completion of this first phase of study, a stronger role by the cities
of Brooklyn and Cleveland and other stakeholders will be required before moving forward and that
public input will be a major component of any further study.
TLCI / OTHER STUDIES

The examination of potential alternatives, the planning process and potential types of funding for studies,
engineering and construction were discussed with private consultants; separately with a four member
ODOT team; and with two NOACA representatives, all between September 24 and October 10, 2013.
The consensus during all three meetings was that a Transportation for Livable Communities Initiative
(TLCI) planning grant through NOACA led by the two cities was the best starting point for further study.
Other transportation, environmental, economic and land use studies could be performed concurrently or
following the completion of the TLCI. NOACA representatives stated at that time that they may be able to
assist with traffic studies for this initiative in-house, beyond the funding applied through a TLCI study.
During meetings in October and November 2013, representatives of both cities agreed to apply for
TLCI funding for further study if/when it next becomes available and that the City of Brooklyn should
be the applicant with the City of Cleveland as a partner. This phase of study should seek to:
● Solicit public input

● Assess economic impacts
● Perform traffic modeling
● Develop a preferred plan with recommendations
Ongoing discussions continued to find this to be the best approach. An application for the current
round of TLCI planning grants was submitted by the City of Brooklyn March 6, 2015 with the City of
Cleveland and Big Creek Connects as partners. Both cities passed resolutions noting the partnership
with Brooklyn as the applicant. Letters of support for the application are noted in the
Acknowledgments section. If awarded, the preferred plan will include a planning level cost estimate,
a phasing/implementation strategy and identify funding sources. For the full scope and deliverables
for the $98,000 project, see Appendix I. Grant award announcements are anticipated in June 2015.
NEORSD has indicated possible technical support in assisting with the development of hydrologic modeling
of Big Creek within the immediate project area and technical support for the development of a preliminary
stream design of the proposed channel alignment depicted in these concept plans. The Ohio EPA’s
Northeast District Office’s Division of Surface Water stated that they can start evaluating stream habitat
quality at various points along the existing channel beginning in the spring of 2015. This evaluation process
would need to be performed over a period of years before stream re-engineering work could be undertaken.

BCC is working with NEORSD, Ohio EPA, Cleveland Metroparks and others to determine potential habitat
improvements and fish passage upstream via a new stream alignment. It is important to note, however, that
improvements to the stream will be dependent on watershed management activities addressing water
quality, volume and velocity from communities upstream of the project area in future years.
Moving forward, Interchange Modification and Interchange Justification Studies will need to be performed
as part of the ODOT process if the highway infrastructure changes are sought.
Other measures for each city to consider during this early phase of study include:
 Undertaking a Health Impact Assessment for the surrounding communities based on land use
changes proposed in the concept plans
 Developing comprehensive Master Plans for the Stockyards and other neighborhoods as the concept
plans move forward
 Re-examining the municipal boundary between the cities of Brooklyn and Cleveland that currently
follows an historic Big Creek alignment
 The cities and other stakeholders should consider providing annual support to Big Creek Connects,
as it remains the primary organization driving this and related projects throughout the Big Creek
watershed
FUNDING
As ODOT representatives have stated, a project of the scope depicted in these concept plans will need to be
“locally driven”. Funding for the major components would need to proceed through the ODOT’s
Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) process to determine eligibility. A large part of funding
for construction of such a project would have to come through local sources. These could include funding
received through the following agencies:
o Ohio Department of Natural Resources (multiple programs)

o Ohio EPA (multiple programs)
o NOACA - STP (Surface Transportation Program)
o NOACA - CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality)
o ODOT - Safety Funds
More descriptive funding mechanisms and project phasing details will be sought through the next
phase of study via the TLCI planning grant or other funding sources.
TIMING
Even if a TLCI is awarded during the current funding cycle, and upon completion of the project its
recommendations are favorable towards proceeding with alternatives similar to those found in these
concept plans, due to the lengthy public input process, additional impact studies, land use
negotiations, stream and highway modeling and engineering work necessary, any construction
would not likely begin to occur for 10 years or more for a project of this scale.
These steps are in addition to the funding challenges that lie ahead for a project of this scope. ODOT
District 12 funds, for example, are primarily committed to the Cleveland Innerbelt project for the
foreseeable future.
52 Big Creek / I-71

REFERENCES
 Comprehensive Arterial Highway Plan, Cuyahoga County – Ohio: A Report to the Board of County
Commissioners. Knappen, Tippetts, Abbett, McCarthy. February 1955
 Corridor Report for Interstate and Alternate Routes in the Cuyahoga County Freeway System.
Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff, Consulting Engineers. Hal G. Sours, Associate. December
1957
 Parma Freeway Route Location Study. Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff, Consulting
Engineers. Hal G. Sours, Associate. March 1966
 Encyclopedia of Cleveland History. Case Western Reserve University & Western Reserve Historical
Society. 1998-2010
 Flood Relief Options for the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo, URS Corp. August 2000
 Lower Cuyahoga River Total Maximum Daily Load report (Includes Lower Big Creek) approved by
U.S. EPA, September 2003.
 NEORSD Regional Intercommunity Drainage Evaluation (RIDE) Study Draft Report. December
2003.
 Connecting Cleveland 2020 Citywide Plan – Stockyards Neighborhood. 2004
 The Lower Big Creek Study - Phase 2 Report. February 2006
 Our Plan for the Future: City of Brooklyn Master Plan. March 2006
 Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study. December 2007
 Lower Big Creek Greenway Restoration and Redevelopment Plan. June 2008
 Big Creek (Brooklyn) Greenway Trail and Neighborhood Connector Plan. February 2009
 Old Brooklyn/Brooklyn Centre Neighborhood Master Plan. 2009
 Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan. 2010
 Signal Warrant Analysis & Intersection Capacity Analysis West 65th Street. February 2012
 West 65th Street Corridor Light Industrial Market Analysis. May 2012
 Cleveland Metroparks 2020 Plan (2012)
 W. 65th Street Corridor Plan (2013)
 Vibrant NEO 2040. February 2014
 NEORSD 2012 Big Creek Environmental Monitoring: Biological, Water Quality, and Habitat Survey
Results. March 2014

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following individuals contributed to various aspects of this study upon request. *Provided letters of
support for the TLCI application submitted March 6, 2015 by the City of Brooklyn in partnership with the
City of Cleveland and Big Creek Connects.
Public Entities Cuyahoga County Board of Health

City of Brooklyn Meiring Borcherds, Program Coordinator
Richard Balbier, Mayor Cuyahoga County Planning Commission
Katherine Gallagher, Council President Daniel Meaney, Manager - Information & Research
Mary Balbier, Councilwoman Elaine Price, Program Manager - Greenspace
Andy Celcherts, Councilman Cuyahoga County
Anthony DeMarco, Councilman Chuck Germana, Councilman
Kathleen Pucci, Councilwoman Dale Miller, Councilman
Kevin Tanski, Councilman Paul Ciupa, Project Manager/Traffic Engineer,
Ron Van Kirk, Councilman Department of Public Works
Regis Barrett, Chair, Board of Zoning Appeals Mike Foley, Director, Department of Sustainability
Cleveland Metroparks
David Kulcsar, Building Commissioner
Brian Zimmerman, Executive Director
Fran Migliorino, Director of Economic Development
Christopher Kuhar, Executive Director, Cleveland
John Verba, Service Director
Metroparks Zoo
City of Cleveland
Gayle Albers, Manager, Watershed Stewardship
Kevin J. Kelley, Council President - Ward 13*
Center
Anthony Brancatelli, Councilman - Ward 12
Mike Durkalec, Aquatic Biologist
Joe Cimperman, Councilman - Ward 3
Jennifer Greiser, Senior Natural Resources Area
Brian J. Cummins, Councilman - Ward 14* Manager - Urban Watersheds
Jay Westbrook, former Councilman - Ward 16 Jim Kastelic, former Senior Park Planner
Matt Zone, Councilman - Ward 15 Sara Maier, Senior Strategic Park Planner
Darnell Brown, Chief Operating Officer Richard Kerber, former Chief Planning and Design
George Cantor, Chief City Planner Officer
Freddie Collier, Director - Cleveland City Planning John Reinier, Wetland Ecologist
Commission Patty Stevens, former Chief of Planning, Senior
Andy Cross, Traffic Engineer Landscape Architect
James DeRosa, Commissioner of Real Estate Claire Weldon, Aquatic Research Coordinator
Trevor Hunt, Neighborhood Planner Cuyahoga Community College
John James, Research & Policy Analysis Manager Terry Greathouse, Assistant Professor, Biological
Valarie J. McCall, Chief of Governmental & Sciences
International Affairs Cuyahoga Soil & Water Conservation District*
Jenita McGowan, Chief of Sustainability Janine Rybka, District Administrator
Glenn Murray, Chief Architect, Master Plans Jared Bartley, Watershed Coordinator
Examiner, Department of Building and Housing Todd Houser, former Stormwater Program Manager
Edward W. Rybka, Chief of Regional Development Federal Highway Administration
Rashid Zoghaib, Commissioner, Division of Water Frank Burkett, Senior Planning Specialist
Pollution Control Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority Maribeth Feke, Director, Programming and
Jim White, Director, Sustainable Infrastructure Planning
Programs Michael Schipper, Deputy General Manager,
Cleveland Municipal Court Engineering & Project Management
Honorable Lynn McLaughlin-Murray, Magistrate Valerie Shea, Planning Team Leader
Cleveland Public Library Kent State University, Cleveland Urban Design
Thomas B. Edwards, Map Librarian Collaborative
Daniel Milich, Library Assistant Terry Schwarz, Director
Cleveland State University, Maxine Goodman Levin Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District*
College of Urban Affairs Frank Greenland, Director of Watershed Programs
Thomas Bier, Ph.D, Senior Fellow Mark Link, Stormwater Operations Supervisor
Kirby Date, Community Planning Program Manager Paul Kovalcik, Stormwater Projects Specialist
Matthew Scharver, Watershed Team Leader
54 Big Creek / I-71

Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Great Lakes Biomimicry Collaborative
Grace Gallucci, Executive Director Tom Tyrrell, CEO, Chairman and Founder
Joshua Naramore, Manager of Transportation Greater Cleveland Partnership
Studies Chris Urban, Senior Manager, Physical Development
Ryan Noles, TLCI Planner Midwest Railway Preservation Society
Ohio Department of Transportation – District 12 Steve Wozniak, member
Myron Pakush, Deputy Director The Nature Conservancy
Brian Blayney, Traffic Planning Engineer Jeff Opperman, Senior Freshwater Scientist
Michael Kubek, former Planning Engineer Northeast Ohio Sustainable Communities Consortium
Michael Moriarity, Hydraulics Engineer Hunter Morrison, Director
John Motl, Modes Management Engineer Old Brooklyn Community Development Corporation*
David Short, Planning & Engineering Administrator Jeffrey T. Verespej, Executive Director
John Threat, Utility and Railroad Coordinator Tom Collins, former Commercial Director
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Northeast John A. Jenkins, former Board Member
District Jason A. Powers, Director, Marketing and
Mandy Razzano, Environmental Specialist Development
Ed Wilk, Environmental Specialist Stockyards, Clark Fulton, Brooklyn Center Community
Bill Zawiski, Environmental Supervisor Development Office*
Ohio Lake Erie Commission* Jeff Ramsey, Program Director
Gail Hess, Executive Director Gloria Ferris, Advisory Council Chair
Sandra Kosek-Sills, Environmental Kate Dupuis, Housing Specialist
Specialist/Balanced Growth Coordinator Rebecca Kempton, Chair, Housing Committee
Ohio Rail Development Commission Sasha Ottoson-Deal, Community Planning Manager
Matthew Dietrich, Executive Director Maria Soucek, Economic Development Coordinator
US Army Corps of Engineers Adam Stalder, Economic Development Director
David Schulenberg, Project Manager West Creek Conservancy
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Derek Schafer, Executive Director
Lucy W. Miller, Senior Management Analyst David M. Lincheck, Manager of Operations &
Non-governmental Organizations Conservation
Big Creek Connects* Western Reserve Land Conservancy - Thriving
Mary Ellen Stasek, Chair Communities Institute
Jeffrey Lennartz, Vice Chair Jim Rokakis, Director
` David McBean, RLA, Treasurer Colby Sattler, Urban Forestry & Natural Resources
Roger J. Kalbrunner, Esq., Secretary Manager
Greg Cznadel, Trustee Westside Industrial Retention Network
Neil A. Dick, Trustee Jackie Adams, Industrial Development Manager –
Ann M. Kuula, Trustee CIRI Regions 1 and 5
Aaron Morford, P.E., Trustee Millie Caraballo, Industrial Development Manager –
Matthew W. O’Brien, Trustee CIRI Region 4
Garrett Ormiston, Trustee Professional Consultants
Alfred Penko, P.E., Trustee Behnke Associates
Dennis Petro, former Trustee Matt Hils, Principal
Jim Wohl, former Trustee Biohabitats
Bob Gardin, Executive Director Tom Denbow, Senior Scientist, Great Lakes
John Stein, former intern, GIS specialist Bioregion Team Leader
Bike Cleveland Kevin Greiser, Landscape Ecologist
Jacob Van Sickle, Executive Director Environmental Design Group
Brooklyn Kiwanis Jeff Kerr, Principal
Greg Frey, Member Michelle Johnson, Senior Planner/Project Manager
Canalway Partners* C.W. Courtney Company
Tim Donovan, Executive Director Douglas G. Courtney, Chief Operating Officer
Cuyahoga River Restoration* Michael Baker, Inc.
Jane Goodman, Executive Director Kirsten Bowen, Project Manager
Peter Bode, Watershed Coordinator Jeff Broadwater, Project Manager
Green City Blue Lake Institute, Cleveland Museum of Christopher Owen, NEPA Project Manager
Natural History Debra White, Environmental Manager
David Beach, Director

Storm Water Control Services, LLC Forest City Products
Ed Kelly, Manager Anthony Galang, President
URS Corporation Tradex Corporation
Thomas M. Evans, Green Infrastructure Design Dan Zimbardi, Manager of Financial Planning and
Services Director Analysis
Beth Fulton, Director of Transportation Warwick Products
Dale Schiavoni, Senior Transportation Planner Matt Beverstock, President
Businesses in Denison Access area Other
ACME Refining Bill Callahan former Executive Director, Stockyards Area
David Pisano, Vice President Development Association
Mario Pisano, President Tim Ferris, member, Brooklyn Centre Design Review
Cleveland Propeller & Marine Service Committee
Victoria M. Jones, President Rick Jaworski, former President, Brooklyn Centre
Container Compliance Corp. Historical Society
Daniel Mackall, Vice President Brian Pagnotta, Geographic Information Systems
Steve Ferguson, Project Manager consultant
Festa Foods Jack Ricchiuto, Writer
Tim Fagan, President Greg Soltis, Geographic Information Systems consultant
The following public officials, representing the study area, and member(s) of their staff reviewed this study’s
final draft and provided letters of support for the TLCI application submitted March 6, 2015 by the City of
Brooklyn in partnership with the City of Cleveland and Big Creek Connects:
United States House of Representatives:

Marcy Kaptur – Ohio 9th Congressional District
The Ohio Senate:
Sandra R. Williams – District 21
Michael J. Skindell – District 23
The Ohio House of Representatives:
Bill Patmon – District 10
Nickie J. Antonio – District 13
Martin J. Sweeney – District 14
Nicholas J. Celebrezze – District 15
56 Big Creek / I-71

Appendices
A. Timeline of notable events related to Study Area
B. Community Demographics (2010)
City of Brooklyn; City of Cleveland Neighborhoods: Old Brooklyn & Stockyards
C. Watershed/Drainage Maps
Natural Features: Streams (Watershed)
Land Use 2012 (Watershed)
Problems in Modeled Drainage System, NEORSD (Study Area)
Sanitary/Storm Sewers (Focus Area)
D. Highway Studies
Corridor Report for Interstate and Alternative Routes in the Cuyahoga County
Freeway System (1957):
Figure 13: Recommended Cuyahoga County Freeway System (plan)
Figure 41: Medina Freeway – Big Creek Valley (aerial)
Parma Freeway Route Location Study (1966):
Page 15: Interchange Studies (narrative)
Page 16: Figure 5 - Aerial View of Medina-Parma Freeway
Plate 10: Preliminary Design – Big Creek Valley
E. Greenway/Trail Plans
Proposed Cuyahoga County Park and Boulevard System, June 1916
Proposed Big Creek Greenway Population Buffer Map (2006)
Existing and Planned Pedestrian and Bike Trails – Brooklyn Master Plan (2006)
Lower Big Creek Greenway & Restoration Plan – Overall Map (2008)
Big Creek Greenway Trail Alignment & Neighborhood Connector Plan - Overall Master
Plan (2009)
F. Cleveland Metroparks 2020 Plan: Brookside Reservation/Cleveland Metroparks Zoo
Existing Conditions Summary
Concept Plan - map
Concept Plan - table
G. Stream/Highway Overlay Maps - 1937 vs. 2006
1937 Base Map
2006 Base Map
H. Cost Estimate Details for Concept C-3
I. Project Scope & Deliverables for TLCI Planning Grant
J. Ohio Balanced Growth Program Overview
K. Big Creek Connects Profile
A PPENDIX A HISTORIC TIMELINE OF NOTABLE EVENTS RELATED TO STUDY AREA
 1796 Townships laid out in Connecticut Western Reserve.

 1812 Brooklyn Centre community settled.
 1814 Brighton community settled.
 1818 Brooklyn Township incorporated.
 1867 Brooklyn Village (Cleveland) incorporated.
 1889 South Brooklyn Village incorporated.
 1894 Cleveland annexes Brooklyn Village. Brooklyn Park established.
 1897 Brooklyn Park renamed Brookside Park.
 1900 West Park Cemetery established.
 1902 Linndale Village incorporated.
 1903 Cleveland annexes most of Linndale Village.
 1905 Cleveland annexes South Brooklyn Village.
Metropolitan Park System report submitted by City of Cleveland Engineer William Stinchcomb.
 1907 Cleveland Zoological Park begins transfer from Wade Park to Brookside.
 1922 Ridge Road high level concrete arch bridge built.
 1927 Village of Brooklyn incorporated.
 1950 City of Brooklyn incorporated.
 1957 Corridor Report of the Cuyahoga County Freeway System completed.
 1959 Big Creek 7 Year Storm – 6,000cfs. Overflow floods Zoo; wipes out reptile collection, damages
many buildings.
 1965 Interstate 71 complete from Airport to Bellaire Road.
 1967 Interstate 71 complete from Bellaire Road to Fulton Road.
 1968 City of Cleveland transfers ownership of Zoo to Cleveland Metropolitan Park District.
Cleveland Union Stockyards Co. shuts down.
 1975 Big Creek 33 Year Storm – 9,060 cfs. Causes significant damage and loss of animal life in Zoo.
Old Brooklyn Community Development Corporation established.
 1978 Cleveland property south of I-71 (former West Park Cemetery property) sold to City of
Brooklyn.
 1981 Cleveland Stockyard Area Development Association formed.
 1993 Ridge Road girder-bridge replaces concrete arch bridge.
City of Cleveland transfers ownership of Brookside Park to Cleveland Metroparks.
 1996 Denison Avenue/Fulton Road entrance to Brookside closed to vehicular traffic.
 2005 Friends of Big Creek organized. Renamed Big Creek Connects in 2014.
 2010 Big Creek Watershed Balanced Growth Plan completed. State Endorsed in 2011.
 2012 Big Creek/I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative study begins.
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative A-1

COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHICS (2010)
A PPENDIX B CITY OF BROOKLYN; CITY OF CLEVELAND NEIGHBORHOODS:
OLD BROOKLYN & STOCKYARDS

 POPULATION

Total 11169 39282 10372

Population

 AGE

Age Distribution City of Cleveland City Neighborhoods
Brooklyn Old Brooklyn Stockyards

# % # % # %

75 +

2144 19.2 1914 6.0 1070 8.9

60‐74 1414 12.7 3728 11.7 949 9.2

35‐59 1458 13.1 12135 37.9 3185 30.7

25‐34 1416 12.7 4498 14.1 1386 13.4

18‐24 1310 11.7 2729 8.5 1311 12.6

0‐17 1703 15.2 7005 21.9 4044 33.6

http://neocando.case.edu/neocando (# 2006‐2010 5‐yr estimate)

 DIVERSITY

Racial Makeup City of Cleveland City Neighborhoods

% % %
84.3 82 56
White

Black 5.2 8 19

Asian 3.9 1 1

Am‐Indian 0.2 0.3 1
Other 4.0 5 18

Two + Race 2.4 3 5

City of Cleveland City Neighborhoods

Population # % # % # %
Latino 1165 10.4 4414 14 3626 35

Non‐Latino 10004 89.6 27595 86 6746 65

Sources: United States Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census;

American Community Survey 2006‐2010 5 Year Estimates;

Cleveland City Planning. Compiled by BCC.

Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative B-1

 FAMILIES & HOUSEHOLDS

Households 5153 ‐ ‐

# % # % # %

1‐Person Household 1925 37.4 5480 38 953 26
Multi‐Person Household ‐ ‐ 8786 62 2662 74
Family Households 2926 56.8 7667 54 2427 67
Non‐Family Households 2227 43.2 6599 46 1187 33
Households with Person(s) under 18 1261 24.5 3842 27 1558 43
Households with Person(s) 65 and over 1657 32.2 4405 31 1007 28

Family Households with Own Children under 18 647 12.6 3769 ‐‐ 1376 ‐
Husband‐Wife 1965 38.1 1838 53 421 33
Male Householder, no Wife Present 250 4.9 402 12 168 13
Female Householder, no Husband Present 711 13.8 1208 35 692 54
 EDUCATION ATTAINMENT
# % # % # %
High School‐less than 9th grade 316 3.8 1357 6.0 994 18
No High School 1463 10.9 3306 14 978 17
High School degree 5755 42.9 9662 41 1861 31
Some College 3108 23.2 4884 21 920 16
Associates Degree 1054 7.9 1156 5 148 4
Bachelor’s Degree 1137 8.5 1839 8 72 2
Graduate/Professional Degree 381 2.8 904 4 58 1
 HOUSING UNITS
Total Units City of Cleveland City Neighborhoods
# % # % # %
Occupied Housing Units 5506 94 14266 90 3615 80
Vacant Housing Units 353 6 1646 10 883 20
Renter v Owner (for all occupied housing units)
Owned w/mortgage or loan 1741 34 6310 44 911 25
Owned free and clear 1284 25 2387 17 573 16
Renter Occupied 2128 41 5569 39 2131 59


 INCOME
Median Household Income 41,637 39282 19658
Income Brackets
Household Income City of Cleveland City Neighborhoods
# % # % # %
<$10k 262 5.4 1516 19 803 19
$10k ‐ $19k 384 7.9 1963 14 1124 20
$20k ‐ $29k 729 15.1 2047 14 666 14
$30k ‐ $39k 627 13.0 1701 12 467 12

$40k ‐ $49k 958 19.8 1794 13 192 9
$50k ‐ $74k 846 17.5 2743 7.0 399 14

$75k ‐ $99k 664 13.7 1385 6.0 68 2
$100k ‐ $149k 256 5.3 965 4.0 44 1.3

$150k ‐$199k 67 1.4 94 1.0 0 1
$200k + 42 0.9 29 0.4 0 .4

Households with…. City of Old Brooklyn Stockyards
Brooklyn
# % # % # %
Social Security Income 1759 36.4 3807 27 1035 27
Supplemental Security Income 288 6.0 793 6 750 20

Public Assistance Income 154 3.2 439 3 418 11
Received Food Stamps‐Last Year 535 11.1 2166 15 1487 39
 EMPLOYMENT
% % %
In Labor Force 61.5 67 52
Unemployed 6.5 10 24

Sources: United States Census Bureau 2010 Decennial Census; American
Community Survey 2006‐2010 5 Year Estimates; Cleveland City Planning. Compiled
by BCC.

 POVERTY
% % %
Poverty Rate 14.4 18 47
Child Poverty Rate 27.6 25 64
Elder Poverty Rate (+65) 7.9 16 24
 TRANSPORT
Workers: # % # % # %

Drove to Work Alone 4276 93 14136 90 2220 81
Public Transportation 131 3 702 5 404 15
Walked to Work 46 1 276 2 81 3
Work from Home 83 2 375 2 17 1
Other Means 32 1 167 1 22 1
 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
# % # % # %
Education, Health Care, Social Assist. 996 20 ‐ 19 ‐ 13
Manufacturing 750 15 15 ‐ 20
Arts, Recreation, Entertainment, Food Service 461 9.1 ‐ 12 ‐ 11
1.21Retail Trade 547 11 ‐ 11 ‐ 11
Professional, scientific, admin & waste mgt. 496 9.8 ‐ 8.3 ‐ 17
Finance, Insure, real estate, rent & lease 336 6.7 ‐ 7.6 ‐ 3.9
Utilities, Transport & Warehousing 365 7.2 ‐ 6.2 ‐ 4.4
Other Services 330 6.5 ‐ 3.6 ‐ 9.8
Construction 238 4.7 ‐ 6.0 ‐ 4.4
Wholesale Trade 194 3.8 ‐ 3.9 ‐ 5.3
Information 69 1.4 ‐ 1.8 ‐ 0.0
Agriculture, fishing, forestry, mining 19 0.4 ‐ 0.2 ‐ 0.0
Other Services 330 6.5 ‐ 3.6 ‐ 9.8
http://neocando.case.edu/neocando (# 2006‐2010 5‐yr estimate)

WATERSHED/DRAINAGE MAPS
A PPENDIX C
NATURAL FEATURES: STREAMS (WATERSHED)
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative C-1

A PPENDIX C
LAND USE 2012 (WATERSHED)

A PPENDIX C PROBLEMS IN MODELED DRAINAGE SYSTEM, NEORSD (STUDY
AREA)

A PPENDIX C
SANITARY/STORM SEWERS (FOCUS AREA)

HIGHWAY STUDIES
A PPENDIX D CORRIDOR REPORT FOR INTERSTATE AND ALTERNATIVE ROUTES IN
THE C UYAHOGA COUNTY F REEWAY S YSTEM (1957):
FIGURE 13: RECOMMENDED CUYAHOGA COUNTY FREEWAY
SYSTEM (PLAN)
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative D-1

HIGHWAY STUDIES
A PPENDIX D CORRIDOR REPORT FOR INTERSTATE AND ALTERNATIVE ROUTES IN
THE C UYAHOGA COUNTY F REEWAY S YSTEM (1957):
FIGURE 41: MEDINA FREEWAY --- BIG CREEK VALLEY (AERIAL)

HIGHWAY STUDIES
A PPENDIX D PARMA FREEWAY ROUTE LOCATION STUDY (1966):
PAGE 15: INTERCHANGE STUDIES (NARRATIVE)

HIGHWAY STUDIES
PAGE 16: FIGURE 5 - AERIAL VIEW OF MEDINA-PARMA FREEWAY

HIGHWAY STUDIES
PLATE 10: PRELIMINARY DESIGN --- BIG CREEK VALLEY

GREENWAY/TRAIL PLANS
A PPENDIX E PROPOSED CUYAHOGA COUNTY PARK AND BOULEVARD SYSTEM,
JUNE 1916
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative E-1

A PPENDIX E
PROPOSED BIG CREEK GREENWAY POPULATION BUFFER MAP (2006)

A PPENDIX E EXISTING AND PLANNED PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE TRAILS ---
BROOKLYN MASTER PLAN (2006)

A PPENDIX E LOWER BIG CREEK GREENWAY & RESTORATION PLAN ---
OVERALL MAP (2008)

A PPENDIX E BIG CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ALIGNMENT & NEIGHBORHOOD
CONNECTOR PLAN - OVERALL MASTER PLAN (2009)

CLEVELAND METROPARKS 2020 PLAN: BROOKSIDE
A PPENDIX F
RESERVATION/CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO
EXISTING CONDITIONS SUMMARY
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative F-1

A PPENDIX F
CONCEPT PLAN - MAP

A PPENDIX F
CONCEPT PLAN --- TABLE

STREAM/HIGHWAY OVERLAY MAPS - 1937 VS. 2006
A PPENDIX G
1937 BASE MAP
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative G-1

STREAM/HIGHWAY OVERLAY MAPS - 1937 VS. 2006
A PPENDIX G
2006 BASE MAP
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative G-2

A PPENDIX H COST ESTIMATE DETAILS FOR CONCEPT C-3
BIG CREEK I‐71 RELOCATION AND RESTORATION INITIATIVE ‐ CONCEPT C3 ESTIMATE

Summary of costs:

Stream Relocation: $ 12,600,000
Access Drives and Bike Trails: $ 7,800,000
I‐71/Denison/Ridge Reconstruction:
Removals: $ 2,540,000
I‐71 Roadway Reconstruction: $ 9,640,000
Bridge: $ 24,920,000
I‐71/Ridge Interchange: $ 15,500,000
Subtotal: $ 73,000,000

Contingency (30%): $ 21,900,000
Subtotal: $ 94,900,000

Planning, Environmental, and Engineering (15%): $ 14,300,000

Construction Admin. And Inspection (7%): $ 6,700,000
Total Budget: $ 115,900,000
Source: ODOT Procedure for

Budget Estimating - May 2013 1 Concept C3 - 12/2014
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative H-1

Source: ODOT's Procedure

for Budget Estimating - May 2013 2 Concept C3 - 12/2014

Stream Excavation EX. GROUND

1
1
h = 24'
3
3

100’

EX. GROUND PROP. STREAM ELEV. h
705 690 15
720 680 40
696 670 26
690 660 30
670 650 20
650 640 10
704 640 64
630 630 0
AVG. = 25.625
Area = ((100 x 25.625) + (3 x 25.625))/27

97.8 cy/ft

Assume 1/4 shale excavation ‐

0.25 97.8 cy/ft 8400 lft $ 30 /cy $6,158,542
3/4 earth excavation ‐
0.75 97.8 cy/ft 8400 lft $ 8 /cy $4,926,833
Stream Restoration ‐ …….. $1,500,000

Subtotal: $12,600,000



Access Drives:

1 mile 3 lanes $415,000 /lane‐mile $1,245,000
Bike Trails:

Fill existing Big Creek

Assume

75 cy/lft 5800 lft $9 /cy $3,915,000
Trail on old creek alignment

5800 lft 5280 ft/mile $500,000 /mile $549,242
All other trails:

4 miles $500,000 /mile $2,000,000
Subtotal: $7,800,000



Pavement Removed:

I‐71 SB, Denison to I‐71 SB and I‐71 NB to Denison

DesignationArea (SF)

R1 245000
R2 365000
R3 70000
R4 75000
R5 45000
800000 sft 1 sy 9 sft 88888.89 sy
$ 8 /sy $ 711,111

Bridges Removed:

Ridge Road over I‐71:

50000 sft

I‐71 NB to Denison over I‐71 SB:

41000 sft

91000 sft $ 20 /sft $ 1,820,000
Subtotal: $ 2,540,000


for Budget Estimating - May 2013 5 Concept C-3 - 12/2014

Proposed I‐71 Southbound Pavement:

8000 ft
Assume 4‐12’ lanes

8000 lft 5280 lft/mile 4 lanes $ 478,000 /lane mile $ 2,900,000
Outside shoulder + 2 inside shoulders:

8000 lft 5280 lft/mile 3 lanes $ 345,000 /lane mile $ 1,600,000
Lighting:

8000 lft $ 100 /lft $ 800,000
Drainage:

8000 lft $ 500 /lft $ 4,000,000
Signs and Pavement Markings:

$200,000 per miles for signs
$3,000 per lane mile for lane lines
$5,000 per lane mile for edge lines

/lane mile /lane mile
$200,000 /mile (signs) $5,000 (lane lines) 3 lanes $3,000 (edge lines) 3 lanes 8000 lft 5280 ft/mile $ 339,394
Subtotal: $ 9,640,000



Bridges

I‐71 NB and SB over Relocated Big Creek (2 Structures):

2 Structures 220 ft 158 ft $175 /sft $12,166,000
CSX over Relocated Big Creek (2 Structures):

2 Structures 220 ft 20 ft $900 /sft $7,920,000
Access Road over Big Creek:

1 Structure 200 ft 33 ft $175 /sft $1,155,000
Bridge over NS and W. 56th Access Road:

1 Structure 200 ft 105 ft $175 /sft $3,675,000
Subtotal: $ 24,920,000


New Ridge Road Interchange:
Ramps:

1100 ft 4 ramps 28 ft wide 1 sy 9 sft $ 68 /sy $ 930,844
Retaining Walls (assume walls between 71NB and CSX to support ramps to and from Ridge Road)

2 ramps 2 walls/ramp 1100 ft 12 ft ht $ 150 /sft $ 7,920,000
Bridges:

Ridge over I‐71:

19000 sft $ 175 /sft $ 3,325,000
Ridge over Big Creek:

250 ft 64 ft $ 175 /sft $ 2,800,000
Lighting:

Interchange lighting $ 500,000
Subtotal:$ 15,500,000


A PPENDIX I PROJECT SCOPE & DELIVERABLES FOR TLCI PLANNING GRANT
Big Creek/I‐71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative
Project Scope & Deliverables for Transportation for Livable Communities (TLCI) Planning Grant
February 27, 2015

Determine Project Goals and Objectives and Public Process ($15k)
 Work with Steering Committee to determine the project goals and Objectives
 Public Involvement – the public process will conform to the project goals and objectives
Traffic Analysis ($20k)
 Traffic counts:
o Peak hour counts only
 Trip Development and Distribution
o Existing & Proposed Trip Generation
o Volume Distribution & Development
 Traffic Analysis
o Existing and design year freeway traffic analysis following ODOT Interchange Modification
Study guidelines.
o Existing and proposed traffic signal analysis.
Assess Economic Impacts ($25k)
 Perform a general market analysis, covering the study area containing the I‐71 interchange project.
The areas covered within the market analysis will include neighborhoods immediately adjacent to
and those within a mile of the proposed infrastructure improvements. The analysis will identify
market supportable land‐uses, post infrastructure improvements (inclusive of residential,
commercial and industrial uses) and the likely absorption period for such uses.
 Conduct both economic and fiscal impact analyses associated with the prospective investment
which may materialize, after infrastructure improvements. Impacts associated with direct and
indirect job creation, economic output, and state and local tax revenues and service costs will be
evaluated.
 Perform an economic impact analysis associated with newly created open/green space (e.g., a
proximity effect analysis to identify the likely incremental increase in real property value, as well as
the likely increase in social capital, due to recreational attractiveness of the open/green space
improvements.)
Conceptual Plan ($38k)
 Land Use Assessment: Property Map of the area with owners’ information and existing land use
 Develop concepts for roadway reconfiguration and pedestrian/bicycle enhancements
 Determine Grading Issues
 Evaluate Structure (Bridge and Wall) Alternatives
 Coordinate Relocated Creek Realignment/Stream Restoration with Design Alternatives
 Determine Environmental Constraints
 Develop Planning Level Cost Estimate, Conceptual Phasing/Implementation and Identify Funding
Sources
 Report

Total Cost: $98,000
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative I-1
A PPENDIX K OHIO BALANCED GROWTH PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative J-1

A PPENDIX K OHIO BALANCED GROWTH PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative J-2

A PPENDIX K BIG CREEK CONNECTS PROFILE

MISSION
To conserve, enhance, and bring recognition to the natural and historic resources of the Big Creek Watershed
and develop a recreational trail network that connects these resources to each other and the community.
BACKGROUND
In 2004 NOACA and agency partners were conducting a Lower Big Creek Valley Study, a comprehensive
planning effort in the City of Cleveland included environmental, land use, transportation, recreational and
economic development elements. The missing component was a focused community support group. Also at this
time, the Ohio EPA and the Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan (RAP) were supporting the creation of
Cuyahoga River tributary watershed groups. By November, 2004 efforts to form a Big Creek group were
underway. In 2005, local, county and regional citizens, public officials, agency and non‐profit representatives
met to discuss a strategy for building a sustainable Big Creek support group, a community meeting seeking
public input towards shaping the group’s mission and vision was held and a Steering Committee for Friends of
Big Creek (FOBC) was formed. After nine years since its founding, Friends of Big Creek became Big Creek
Connects (BCC)— a new name that better reflects the organization’s programs and mission.

Today the organization is a non‐profit 501(c)(3) organization with a Board of eleven dedicated individuals.
Former Cleveland Waterfront Coalition President and FOBC co‐founder, Bob Gardin, is Executive Director. An
18‐member Advisory Committee provides input and guidance to the groupʹs efforts. Big Creek Connects now
looks forward to its second decade!
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
Big Creek Connects and the Cuyahoga River Community Planning Organization, with local funding matches from
five watershed communities (Brook Park, Brooklyn, Cleveland, Parma and Parma Heights), were awarded an Ohio
Coastal Management Assistance Grant for a Big Creek Balanced Growth Watershed Management Plan (see
Appendix J). The five watershed communities passed resolutions of support; state endorsement for the plan was
received from the Ohio Lake Erie Commission in 2011. BCC is the lead organization to manage the implementation
of the Plan and communication among the partnership governments and assisting agencies.

A focus of BCC is “stormwater retrofits,” green structural stormwater practices designed to mitigate erosive flows,
reduce pollutants, and promote conditions for improved aquatic habitat that are retrofitted into developed
watersheds.
GREENWAY/TRAIL DEVELOPMENT
Big Creek Connects, Cleveland Metroparks, and the cities of Cleveland and Parma joined the City of Brooklyn as
co‐sponsors for funding from a NOACA Transportation for Livable Communities Initiative (TLCI) grant for the
Big Creek (Brooklyn) Greenway Trail Alignment & Neighborhood Connector Plan. The study seeks to connect
the Metroparks Big Creek and Brookside Reservations through the City of Brooklyn while identifying
opportunities for ecological restoration. This plan was completed in 2009 and complements the Lower Big Creek
Greenway Redevelopment & Restoration Plan completed the prior year. The Big Creek/I‐71 Relocation &
Restoration Initiative study seeks to close gaps where these plans overlap and open up additional land use
opportunities.
BCC also works to conserve parcels in the watershed, opening opportunities for restoration and for an expanded
trail and greenway system.
BCC co‐sponsored 3 successful Greater Cleveland Trails & Greenways Conferences (gctrails.org) biennially 2010‐
2014. Planning is underway for the 2016 Conference.
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative K-1

A PPENDIX K BIG CREEK CONNECTS PROFILE
P.O. Box 609272 info@bigcreekconnects.org
Cleveland, Ohio 44109 www.bigcreekconnects.org
Board of Trustees Advisory Committee
Mary Ellen Stasek, Chair Gayle Albers, Manager, Cleveland Metroparks Watershed
Jeffrey Lennartz, Vice Chair Stewardship Center at West Creek
Roger J. Kalbrunner, Esq., Regis Barrett, Chair, City of Brooklyn Zoning Board of Appeals
Secretary Sean Brennan, President, Parma City Council
David McBean, RLA, George Cantor, Chief City Planner, Cleveland City Planning
Treasurer Commission
Brian J. Cummins, Cleveland City Council—Ward 14
Thomas Coyne
Kyle Dreyfuss‐Wells, Manager of Environmental Programs,
Greg Cznadel Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District
Neil A. Dick Jane Goodman, Director, Cuyahoga River Restoration / Area of
Ann M. Kuula Concern
Aaron Morford, P.E. Kevin J. Kelley, President, Cleveland City Council—Ward 13
Matthew W. OʹBrien James McCall, Parma Heights City Council
Melissa Miller, Planning and Safety Coordinator, Bellaire‐Puritas
Development Corporation
Executive Director Kathleen Pucci, Brooklyn City Council
Bob Gardin Rory Robinson, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Rivers, Trails, and
216.269.6472 mobile Conservation Assistance, National Park Service
Jim Rokakis, Vice President, Western Reserve Land Conservancy,
216.661.7706 office
Director, Thriving Communities Institute
bgardin@bigcreekconnects.org Janine Rybka, District Administrator, Cuyahoga Soil and Water
Conservation District
Office
Derek Schafer, Executive Director, West Creek Conservancy
4352 Pearl Road, Suite C Laura Travers, Sanitarian, Cuyahoga County Board of Health
(2d floor, entrance on Jeffrey T. Verespej, Executive Director, Old Brooklyn Community
Brooklyn Ave.) Development Corporation
Rachid Zoghaib, Commissioner, City of Cleveland Water Pollution
Cleveland, Ohio 44109
Control
Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative K-2

March 2015

Big Creek

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Big Creek

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Big Creek

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Big Creek / I-71 Relocation & Restoration Initiative

Principal author: Bob Gardin – Executive Director, Big Creek Connects

Graphic renderings: Brian Pagnotta – Geographic Information Systems consultant

Funding provided by:

Relocation & Restoration Initiative i

ii Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative iii

Figure 2: Big Creek – Brooklyn Twp map (1912)

Figure 3: Big Creek – Parma Freeway proposal (c.1966)

Figure 4: Brooklyn Master Plan: Current Land Use Map (2006)

Figure 7: Brooklyn Master Plan: City-Wide Plan, p.124 (2006)

Figure 8: Re-envisioning the Stockyard Neighborhood study: Treatment Diagram (2007)

Figure 14: Existing Conditions

Figure 15: Concept Plan A

Figure 16: Concept Plan B

Figure 17: Concept Plan C-1

Figure 18: Concept Plan C-2

Figure 19: Concept Plan C-3

Figure 20: Southwest Aerial rendering – Existing

Figure 21: Southwest Aerial rendering – Concept Plan B

Figure 22: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Existing

Figure 23: Brookside Ground Level rendering – Proposed

iv Big Creek / I-71

 Solicit public input

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 1

2 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 3

Figure 1: Study and Focus Areas

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 5

6 Big Creek / I-71

METROPOLITAN PARK SYSTEM

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 7

8 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 9

10 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 11

12 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 13

14 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 15

16 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 17

18 Big Creek / I-71

Big Creek Drop Structure, Brookside Reservation

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 19

20 Big Creek / I-71

 Denison Access Removal without Alternative Interchange: See Concept Plan A

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 21

22 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 23

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 25

Figure 10: W. 65th Street Corridor Plan: Separated all-purpose trail

Figure 11: W. 65th Street Corridor Plan: Southern Industrial Area

 Conservation and restoration in Priority Conservation Areas and redevelopment in Priority

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 27

28 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 29

30 Big Creek / I-71

Relocation & Restoration Initiative 31