APD 40 annexation eyed by planners

By BRIAN GRAVES

Posted 1/31/18

The Cleveland Municipal Planning Commission broached the idea of the city completely annexing APD 40.

This item is available in full to subscribers

APD 40 annexation eyed by planners

Posted

The Cleveland Municipal Planning Commission broached the idea of the city completely annexing APD 40, during a formal session of the governing body Tuesday.

The bypass currently is not completely within the Cleveland corporate limits.

Commissioner Larry Presswood said it's an idea that needs to be seriously discussed.

Presswood asked City Planner Corey Divel if the road was in the Urban Growth Plan.

“I believe it is, because I know at one time City Council requested us to evaluate that,” Divel said. “We looked at that and it was pretty expensive so they didn’t think it was appropriate at the time to annex it — just based on providing lights, maintenance and that sort of thing.”

“Part of it is in the city and part of it is outside the city,” Presswood said. “It is not really anywhere near the potential of what it could be.”

“With no lights out there, it is very dangerous, as well as Blue Springs road and the other interchanges,” he added. “I really think it could be an asset to the community if that whole bypass would be looked at to be improved with lights and everything else.”

Presswood said he did not know exactly what those improvement would take.

“Whether it can be annexed by the city or not, right now it’s a hodgepodge,” he said.

Commissioner and City Council member David May Jr. said the road was supposed to be renamed at one time.

“Come to find out, it’s only renamed up to the city limits,” May said. “Then it still goes by APD 40.”

“It’s just ridiculous,” Presswood said. “The whole bypass needs to be looked at. I’ve lived here all my life, and I get confused when I get off of those exits such as Blue Springs and everywhere else. I think from a signage standpoint and a lighting standpoint — even if we have to work with the county on it — to me it’s one of the most unpleasing appearances.”

Divel said there would need to be an evaluation as to whether state statutes would allow such an annexation of the road.

“We have looked at the costs before, but now the statutes have changed, and I’m not sure we are allowed to do that,” he said.

Comments

No comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment

X

Print subscribers have FREE access to clevelandbanner.com by registering HERE

Non-subscribers have limited monthly access to local stories, but have options to subscribe to print, web or electronic editions by clicking HERE

We are sorry but you have reached the maximum number of free local stories for this month. If you have a website account here, please click HERE to log in for continued access.

If you are a print subscriber but do not have an account here, click HERE to create a website account to gain unlimited free access.

Non-subscribers may gain access by subscribing to any of our print or electronic subscriptions HERE