UrbanOhio.com

Projects And Transportation => Transportation => Roads & Biking => Topic started by: clvlndr on May 05, 2005, 01:58:50 PM

Title: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on May 05, 2005, 01:58:50 PM
I'm just wondering what happens to the Interstate 90 designation if, in fact, Mayor Jane is successful in converting our hallowed lakefront freeway into local boulevard with at-grade street (& pedestrian) crossings, traffic lights and the like.  Wouldn’t I-90 have to be re-routed?  (like say, following 271 (south) to 480 to 77 to 490 (then home again)?  How does that work?  Would there be any adverse affects to our region in terms of, say, Fed maintenance and expansion money (not that we NEED any more freeways around Cleveland, but you get the point)?.  Are Federally designated interstates like, say, FAA designated airports (s'pose all of those are such otherwise they can't possibly be allowed to operate), in the sense that, a city/region/state needs strict permission from the Feds to downgrade an interstate since it (probably) is designated as a major interstate (duh! -- hence its name) carrier of freight and even military equipment?

And while you're on it, please feel free to opine on Jane's grandiose lakefront plan.  Is it smart or a waste of time?  Is it doable?  And will it really have the positive impact on Cleveland's lakeshore she claims?

Anybody?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on May 05, 2005, 02:14:04 PM
Well, isn't it just the shoreway that will be downgraded?  Once the westside shoreway links up with I-90, the boulevard will hug 90 until it reaches Gordon Park.  Am I wrong?  I don't think that 90 will be touched by this plan.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: smackem81 on May 05, 2005, 02:21:31 PM
Dead mans curve is where I-90 curves away,and the shorway continues west. I also dont belive route 2(the shoreway) is a federaly designated highway as it turns into a regular roadway as it reaches perry in the east and in toledo in the west
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: mrnyc on May 05, 2005, 02:33:17 PM
i believe rta and ciperman have vague plans to expand the ecp bus thingy out there when that project happens. not sure, i think i read that.

i say run the wfl rapid track west down the middle of the new calmed boulevard and continue it down clifton to w117th. train to the beach! train to the beach!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on May 05, 2005, 02:46:01 PM
Could the present waterfront line go from Muni lot to Tower city, then go to the W. 25th stop via the red line bridge and then (somehow) link to the lakefront blvd?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Equillibrius on May 05, 2005, 07:16:15 PM
Quote
i believe rta and ciperman have vague plans to expand the ecp bus thingy out there when that project happens. not sure, i think i read that.

i say run the wfl rapid track west down the middle of the new calmed boulevard and continue it down clifton to w117th. train to the beach! train to the beach!

RTA once talked about running BRT down Clifton a few years ago.  I think KJP or someone else mentioned this.  And I agree with expanding the Waterfront Line. The west side needs its own light rail route, dagnabbit!

Quote
Could the present waterfront line go from Muni lot to Tower city, then go to the W. 25th stop via the red line bridge and then (somehow) link to the lakefront blvd?

The W. 25th rapid station is a little too far away from the Shoreway.  The line would have to make a whole lot of twists and turns to get down to 25th and the back up to the lake.  It would make for an interesting route, though.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on May 05, 2005, 09:23:13 PM
Well, isn't it just the shoreway that will be downgraded? Once the westside shoreway links up with I-90, the boulevard will hug 90 until it reaches Gordon Park. Am I wrong? I don't think that 90 will be touched by this plan.

I'm not really sure either, but I kinda thought the prop'd Boulevard would replace I-90 from Dead Man's Curve/the Inner Belt to around Gordon Park, where the Shoreway jogs inward from the Lake (at ritzy Bratenhal) and technically turns into the Lakeland Freeway. I didn't get the impression that the Blvd and 90 would coexist.  Again, I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on May 05, 2005, 09:45:09 PM
[RE: waterfront line extension to the West]

Agreed.  I think BRT would be horrible for Clifton Blvd; can you imagine marring that majestic broad blvd of lovely homes and old brownstone apts w/ BRT-type stations?  I know, some will say, hey look at Shaker Blvd and Van Aken and even Fairmount (that one time had streetcars in its blvd).  But it's much different when the trolleys are their 1st (and I emphasize TROLLEYS not diesel/electric buses) and homes follow, not vice versa.  BRT’s a farce and with Rapid rail running near that corridor that could be cheaply  extended – relative to building a whole new right of way, choosing a BRT extension would be a total, el-cheap-o cop out – but don’t put it past Joe C, who’s suddenly become the nation’s biggest BRT champion – figures, huh?  (Joe despises the Waterfront Line, in case you missed it)

I'm not sure, though, whether extending the Waterfront line along the West shoreline is the way to go; maybe.  Yes, I know that empty subway deck of the Veteran’s Memorial Bridge looks too attractive to pass up.  It's just that this western corridor not a particularly wide transit-less area before the lake line slopes inward toward the Red Line stop @ West Blvd/Cudell.  However, I am all for extending Rapid service from their westward through the heart of Lakewood to Rocky River and beyond over the lightly used NS tracks, where service is so light I'm sure RTA could strike a deal to share tracks in a day passenger/night freight deal -- although I suppose sleepless Lakewood residents along that stretch would be none-to-pleased at that set up.  Such a NS Lakewood line would give Lakewood riders a speedy shot directly into Tower City as well as an airport transfer option at W. Blvd.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: the pope on May 06, 2005, 12:44:10 AM
what's so bad about BRT if done properly?

lrt has dedicated lanes, defined stations, and overhead catenary (at least cleveland's in this case)
BRT (silver line) has dedicated lanes, defined stations, overhead catenary, signal timing, and damn cheaper

(KJP or anyone feel free to correct me, i'm living up to my title now)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on May 06, 2005, 11:36:12 AM
I believe one argument is that "a bus is still a bus," but I'll let some of the other BRT-doubters explain in more depth if they want.

As for the boulevard and how it relates to I-90..  My initial impression was that the Lakefront Boulevard would basically commence at the shoreway where it splits at Dead Man's curve.  That would allow I-90 to remain I-90 since that's where it turns south.

But I'm looking at a map on the Cleveland Planning Commission site and it appears that they are indeed proposing that the boulevard go all the way out eastward to Gordon Park (sort of branching out at the northen end of MLK.  But the map shows what appears to be the proposed boulevard running alongside the currently existing freeway along the lakefront.  They propose moving the i-90 interchange at E. 55th south towards the railroad tracks (which, incidentally, are denoted as a waterfront line extension east out to Collinwood)..  The interstate then swings back north around Kirtland park before turning south at a more gently-arched innerbelt curve.

This layout confuses me because I don't see how a lakefront boulvevard is going to co-exist situated north of the existing highway since I-90 hugs the shoreline so tightly as it does in a lot of spots.  It seems physically impossible given the current geography unless the interstate gets cut down to 2-3 lanes apiece.  Is the boulevard just a glorified version of that north Marginal road?  Especially just north of that big powerplant where unless they extend the shorelne out a bit there's definitely not enough room for anything that can be called a "boulevard".    And even then I'm not sure how "pedestrian friendly" such a boulevard would be with 4-6 lanes of interstate highway flying by just something like 100 feet south of it. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on May 06, 2005, 12:09:19 PM
The perception is that BRT is a poor-man's light-rail line. And, Pope, your use of the word "cheaper" than light rail transit is correct in one way -- it's usually a cheap imitiation of rail. And, depending on how either is designed, the net fiscal impact of a BRT line may not be better than an LRT. Too often, transit agencies give too much weight to the capital and operating cost side, and not enough to the operating revenues and economic impact.

Back to issue of the Lakefront Boulevard... Technically, the Shoreway ends at I-90's soon-to-be-eased "Dead Man's Curve." There, it will have a new interchange with the Lakefront Boulevard, which will continue east to the Gordon Park area (even underway the Lakefront Parkway option).

All questions can be answered by looking at the city's maps or PowerPoint presentation at:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html

KJP
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on May 06, 2005, 01:32:20 PM
KJP the question is, how is the Lakefront Boulevard going to extend east to Gordon Park if the highway is sitting right there.

The maps show both roadways running what I will call "ridiculously close" to one another and often in places where it does not appear geographically possible.  There are a couple spots between dead man's curve and Gordon Park where the highway runs as little as 20-40 feet from the shore:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=cleveland,+oh&ll=41.536957,-81.642880&spn=0.004935,0.007703&t=k&hl=en

As far as I can tell from the maps on the planning commission's website, the power plant site just south of the highway in that photo will not be touched, so where is there room for a boulevard, is the question.  Is the shoreline going to be extended out somehow to make room, or is the highway going to shrink?  I kind of sense that this portion of the boulevard, with so little room for development since it's right up against the lake, would be more for purposes of access for near east siders coming by car to the alleged development that would happen west of the airport.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: smackem81 on May 06, 2005, 02:05:27 PM
"The shoreway" aka route 2 aka lakeland parkway, is combined with interstate 90, from the 90/2 interchange on the border of euclid and wickliff, they seperate at dead mans curve. The proposed shoreway changes occur at dead mans curve and to the west, i dont think it is phsyicaly possible to change anything from dead mans curve and to the east, nor do i think there are any plans for that part.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on May 06, 2005, 08:14:08 PM
Preach, KJP!!  BRT as alternative for rail BECAUSE it's cheap is a farce auto interests and conservatives (one in the same?) are shoving down our throats. Boston's a perfect example of over planning.  This city rates as my #2 transit system in the country, after NYC, but they've been marching in reverse in recent years – and let’s not even discuss that ghastly “Big Dig.”  Boston was so anxious to tear down the old Orange Line el over Washington Street, they didn't stop and think how damaging to ridership relocating that line to a railroad ROW at the edge of its original corridor, they were forced to develop the "Silver Line" BRT along Washington St.

Well, guess what?  Savvy "T" riders shun BRT buses as if they virus quarantines and Orange Line totals have been hammered.  So no, Pope, I don't see BRT as a viable alternative to rail in any context.  And if the goal is to save money, why bother in the 1st place?  -- and BRT ain't cheap either; not for meager "benefits" it reaps for cities.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on May 06, 2005, 08:23:45 PM
As for the updated (Nov 04) lakefront slideshow, I'm sorry, call me Mr. Wet Blanket.  Is it just me, but don't those "goals" seem very amorphous and intangible, and isn’t it rather late in the process for us to still be at this point with nothing of substance really happening yet?  I mean, this has been Jane Campbell’s centerpiece program since early on in her administration  Also, didn't too many of those artist renderings have a bunch of cars in them?  And wasn’t there a good deal of emphasis on auto access – again, maybe it’s just paranoid me… There were none w/ Waterfront line trains in any artist rendering even though the plan gives some vague lip service to expanding the line eastward.  Did you notice that?

And what about the most vexing problems that must be addressed and solved before anything can really get going, like relocating the Port Authority (what's the latest since Jane's big blowup w/ the County Commissioners?).  What about the cleanup of the brownfields -- mentioned as a program.  The question is -- who pays?  I don't know much about Superfund, even if it's still a viable program, so maybe someone can enlighten me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 01, 2005, 06:28:44 AM
Does anyone know when construction is supposed to start?  Also, I yet to truly understand the location of the new boulevard.  As I drive down the shoreway, I see a bluff, trees and railroad tracks.  Where will the boulevard be located in reference to those items? 

The list of projects in the print edition looks promising.  They are quite vague in their descriptions.  I think the Westinghouse electric area has the greatest potential


Developers bet Shoreway rehab will bring boom
Monday, August 01, 2005
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter
Veteran architect Robert Maschke has an eye for art and for the next big thing in the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood.

He spent hundreds of thousands of dollars converting a greasy spoon into an art gallery and offices at West 64th Street and Detroit Avenue, anticipating the ripple effects of a transformed West Shoreway.

By 2010, the three-mile stretch of 50-mph high way, rued by West Siders as a concrete hurdle to the lake shore, should debut as a friendly, 35-mph boulevard, featuring multiple intersections and a parallel bike path to the north.
   
For the first time in 50-plus years, West Side neighborhoods will have direct access to Lake Erie by foot, car and bike.

"It's the reason I bought this building," Maschke said last week. "Cleveland can reclaim a lakefront it's turned its back on.

"I think it's going to have a real accelerating effect on the neighborhood."

That's what city officials count on. The West Shoreway project stands as the first, big-ticket investment in Mayor Jane Campbell's 50-year plan to redevelop eight miles of forbidding shoreline...



To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

tbreckenridge@plaind.com, 216-999-4695
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on August 01, 2005, 07:23:43 AM
^I agree - imagine having a loft-style condo in the Westinghouse building and having access to a rooftop deck there. Unimpeded views of both the lake and downtown that currently only exist in the Gold Coast.

I think in some cases they may extend some of the streets northward to create the intersections. If they didn't they'd have to mow down places like Tillman Park, etc. and I doubt that's the plan.
 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: zaceman on August 01, 2005, 08:58:50 AM
(http://www.cleveland.com/economy/images/shoreway.gif)

heres a good diagram of what this article is talking about
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 01, 2005, 09:11:15 AM
If you want to see a detailed vision of the Lakefront Boulevard and proposed development sites, check out the Cleveland City Planning Commission's website at http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html and click on "transportation" projects.

KJP
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 01, 2005, 09:34:47 AM
thanks KJP,

still, it seems hard to determine how the lakefront will be connected when there are still the tracks and the bluff.  They need to start working on this now so that I have a better idea of what it will look like. :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: conovercourt on August 01, 2005, 09:41:24 AM
Fantastic!


With the Rapid , and the I-90 freeway, West Side residents are well connected to Downtown. The Shoreway is redundant.  Maybe Cleveland can atone for some of its sins from the destruction of West Blvd. , Lorain and other streets for I-90.


Now, let's see some highrise residence towers to expand the Cleveland skyline beyond Downtown!



...dreaming in Dixie ...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: conovercourt on August 01, 2005, 09:42:52 AM
PS
Wimwar,

Won't the new boulevard replace the current roadway?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 01, 2005, 10:07:39 AM
Yes, but is it going to be exactly in the same location?  In some places, for example, it could hug the bluff and create more space for Edgewater park.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on August 01, 2005, 10:09:50 AM
Are there any plans to incorporate a future extension of blue or green line to serve this area? 

It seems with all of the proposed development from the PD map, that this would be a good opportunity to try and get a line over the river with stops that roughly approximate with Detroit/Superior possible underground station at w.25 (or above ground at w28) and then above ground out to 45th, 54th, 65th/Edgewater, and 76th. 

Even if the right of ways were built into the middle of the new blvd that would be a start.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 01, 2005, 06:48:41 PM
The Lakefront Boulevard is probably going to be in the same location. Look at the development sites that open up between the boulevard and the tracks. And, for access to the south side of the tracks, I would think the extension of West 65th Street northward will be quite beneficial.

There are no plans for incorporating a rail transit line into the new boulevard. Plans are tol add transit stops for existing buses. Transitioning one lane in each direction as bus-only lanes shouldn't be too difficult, creating a defacto BRT.

KJP
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 01, 2005, 07:05:05 PM
KJP,

Do you know when construction is supposed to start?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: A 2 da K on August 02, 2005, 12:09:17 AM
City Says Boulevard To Be Created By 2010

CLEVELAND -- The redevelopment of the west Shoreway into a pedestrian-friendly boulevard may soon be a reality. The plan will make access to the waterfront easier for residents of the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood.

Right now, Lake Erie and Edgewater Park are blocked by speeding cars and barbed wire fencing.

But the city says that by 2010, the plan is to create a boulevard with traffic slowing to 35 mph, pedestrian crosswalks to the lake, a bike path, street lights and new proposed housing.

The new elements will mix with what is already there, places like the Tillman Park condos and restaurants like The Harp.

Planners say the Detroit Shoreway project will also make the city a major player for future development, with big projects planned for Whiskey Island while working alongside the Cleveland Metroparks System.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on August 02, 2005, 05:53:55 PM
Great to hear that they are going to move fairly quickly on this.  2010 isn't that far off, really.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 02, 2005, 06:01:21 PM
Will they start or finish in 2010?  How long would construction take?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on August 02, 2005, 09:17:49 PM
I think that no "improved" rail options along the roadway is wrong.

Rapid Rail could be marketed as a quick way to get downtown, now that the "shoreway" will become a "boulevard".

Improved bus service (dedicted lane) on this roadway doesn't make those that use it now for a quick trip down town happy.

Connecting our neighborhoods and making transportation a FIRST CHOICE EVERYDAY PART OF LIFE instead of an ALTERNATIVE is smart and will increase development.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jmart on August 03, 2005, 01:18:38 PM
Im very happy to see the blvd get some more push..  BUT.. I have to disagree with Conoovercourt..  I take the shoreway in from west blvd every day because of how "retarded" I--90 is.. from the drivers to the entire drive itself..  I hate it...  I will use the blvd once completed for both the view and my hatred for of 90... 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 04, 2005, 10:52:37 AM
KJP,

Do you know when construction is supposed to start?

No, but I'm tempted to write an article about it for Sun.

KJP
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 06, 2006, 10:22:47 AM
Public Meeting on July 19th!

http://www.innerbelt.org/Lakefrontwest/LakefrontFactSheet06-06.pdf
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on July 06, 2006, 11:33:58 AM
Public Meeting on July 19th!

http://www.innerbelt.org/Lakefrontwest/LakefrontFactSheet06-06.pdf

Cool. Even better is that it won't conflict with the Regional Rail Stakeholders Meeting at 9:30 a.m. at Westlake City Hall.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on July 06, 2006, 03:15:36 PM
I can't wait to ask, or hope that someone will ask, WHY there is no plan to incorporate RAIL into this plan!!!!  You are taking a heavily traveled corridor, that directly links the most densely populated areas of the region to downtown, along with projects that will cut down on parking lots downtown.....and you AREN'T promoting public transportation with rail????  Makes no real sense to me.  This new Blvd will be a parking lot every morning and evening.  I hope someone is there tht can TRY to convince me that there will be some "really cool BRT".....F that.   This is a great chance to expand rail to an area that would actually USE IT and it also has potential for TOD.....
I am not a city planner nor am I an expert on transportation....but this seems to make sense to me.  I would love to hear some of the resident experts chime in with their opinions.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 06, 2006, 03:18:29 PM
WHY there is no plan to incorporate RAIL into this plan!!!! 

Because its OD :evil: T's project. What did you expect?  
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Mov2Ohio on July 06, 2006, 04:57:39 PM
Along this boulevard will there be any stores or stores on the bottom-homes on the top type apartment/condos? Or will it be something like a scenic drive?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on July 06, 2006, 06:16:39 PM
I can't begin to emphasize how easy it would be to add LRT to the West Shoreway, and I suspect RTA wouldn't have to ante up a single nickel of local funding to pay for its construction. How?

Do it the St. Louis way. This is something I wrote for the next issue of the Ohio Passenger Rail News, due to come out soon....

   The first leg of St. Louis' MetroLink light-rail system opened in 1993, including a downtown subway and a bridge over the Mississippi River to Illinois. The tunnels and bridge, once used by freight trains, offered more than a physical path to building a modern light-rail service. They also offered a financial path for the community to start its light-rail system without spending a single cent of local taxpayers' money.

   The secret was in the value of the abandoned railway tunnels and bridge, estimated at nearly $90 million. A federal transportation funding provision allows a community's equity in a right of way to be counted as part of the local share. In the case of St. Louis, that equity counted for the entire local share, and was used to leverage $355 million in federal funds -- at a 75/25 percent federal/local matching basis.


What similar rail assets could we contribute to the construction of LRT down the West Shoreway? Why, the lower deck of the Detroit-Superior high-level bridge and its two subway stations, of course! Based on estimates of other right-of-way contributions (including St. Louis and potentially Cincinnati), the lower deck of the Detroit-Superior bridge could offer a local equity share of $30 million toward leveraging a federal grant.

If the feds are willing to offer only a 50 percent matching share, then that might get another $30 million. But if the federal share is 80 percent, then the equity from the bridge and subway stations could yield $120 million in federal funds.

The biggest physical barriers to doing this is between the existing tracks in Tower City and the old subway ramp in Superior, and burrowing out the center-median highway ramps to the West Shoreway from the West 25th/Detroit intersection. After that, there could be a ready-made right of way for LRT, all the way from downtown into Lakewood.

This was a topic of discussion at:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=1916.0

And that discussion evolved into realizing that extending LRT into Lakewood could be done for even less money if it were extended west from the existing Red Line at West Boulevard. And, on top of that, it could be done for even less money still if a dual-mode electric-diesel light-rail equipment were used. But ... before even that much money could be secured, there needs to be an effort to eliminate the skepticism about rail locally -- hence the need for a long-term demonstration project. And that's where we are now with the Cleveland-Lorain Regional Rail stakeholders meeting July 19.

I think the equity value of the lower deck of the Detroit-Superior bridge might be better used to secure funds for a downtown streetcar system, so all those historic trolleys hiding in Tower City's underbelly can see the light again.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 07, 2006, 08:02:56 AM
Great response, KJP.  So, if the equity from the bridge right-of-way is used once, that's it?  What are the possibilities of doing this from Downtown without using that equity?  Should I just re-read the other thread?

ODOT should be a major player in rail development throughout Ohio, but they aren't (correct me if I'm wrong!).  RTA should be actively pursuing this, but they aren't (correct me if I'm wrong!).  Who's talking about this?  RTA's 2010 and 2025 long term plans both place rail expansion high on their list, but they don't seem to be pushing for any of it.  NOACA?  Where are they?

And the difficulty of making this happen with the approaches and the underground stations and all that...well, that's where the engineers can come in and re-establish themselves as our allies.  It's possible, so find a way to make it happen.  Don't just feed us the results that ODOT wants you to!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 07, 2006, 08:03:29 AM
By the way, I actually received a notice for this meeting in the mail yesterday...a full 12 days before the event!!!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on July 07, 2006, 02:58:31 PM
As did I. Plus I received an email from the Cleveland Planning Commission.
A pleasent suprise.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: clvlndr on July 09, 2006, 11:35:31 AM
^^KJP's proposal is well taken, and a good idea.  I recall the previous discussion he cited.  I think, given the concurrent discussion about redeveloping Public Sq. by eliminating cross-traffic, that an east-west subway thru the square, out the D-S bridge, diverting to the Shoreway/Blvd West would be the best alternative.  The only tricky thing is that, once the new rail line reaches Edgewater Park, it merges into the territory of the preexisting Red Line (but maybe that's not problem at all, really)... And to the argument against the potentially high cost (I'm not talking spending willy/nilly) I would just note what Bob Stark's been (correctly) saying lately: the failure of Cleveland to succeed is based on it's failure to THINK BIG... I would also note a sports analogy of a long time coach/analyst: no team will EVER be successful (esp in winning a championship) so long as it's primary M.O. is saving money...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 18, 2006, 08:05:11 AM
Shoreway wish list worth $70 million
Hearing aims to pare tab for boulevard
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

City and state planners have big wishes but limited cash to convert the West Shoreway into a lake-friendly boulevard.

Wednesday night, they want you to help them decide how the $50 million project should be laid out.

The city and the Ohio Department of Transportation will roll out eight possible sites for new or improved access along the 2.9 miles of the West Shoreway (Ohio 2) running from West Boulevard to West 25th Street...

The plans will be on the Web soon after the meeting, at www.innerbelt.org (http://www.innerbelt.org). Click on the Cleveland Lakefront West link.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 18, 2006, 08:19:39 AM
Man, this is going to be tough...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on July 18, 2006, 09:34:28 AM
I'm not sure I understand. Are we being asked to help determine which of these intersections can be sacrificed?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on July 18, 2006, 11:03:51 AM
Hmmm, how to save money, and travel time.
I know, how about creating roundabouts at the intersections instead of light traffic signals.


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on July 18, 2006, 01:04:51 PM
I don't know Craig, but he seems to be in charge of a lot of things I don't like, such as the half-assed interbelt, and now a half-assed West Shoreway.

I am sure he is a great person, but I kind of want to punch him.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on July 18, 2006, 01:10:19 PM
Don't punch him, punch -- punch the ODOT Director, whose name I can't remember, and his boss Bob Taft.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 18, 2006, 01:24:56 PM
^Gordon Proctor.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on July 19, 2006, 07:40:30 AM
I would like to see the Shoreway Project foster new development at and around Edgewater Park.

There can be many new retail and residential opportunities that, done carefully, would not restrict public access to the water. Much of the land at Edgewater is wasted space. And the taxes generated from private businesses could be used to improve the Park and keep it clean.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on July 20, 2006, 07:28:58 AM
West Shoreway conversion plans received with enthusiasm, concern
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

Jeff Blazek looks at plans to convert the West Shoreway to a tree-lined boulevard and sees Edgewater Park pushing south to join Lake Avenue, a possibility he loves.

Jerry Schmelzer looks at the same plan and sees increased traffic on Lake Avenue, an inconvenience for tenants in two buildings he owns on that street...

City and state planners want to have a final plan by early next year. The highway conversion is scheduled for completion in 2011.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 20, 2006, 07:32:14 AM
The article gives a pretty accurate account of what happened.  Some people ignorantly bitched, others called for rail inclusion and some just tried to keep their baby quiet (that's me). 

Here is a link to the presentation:  http://www.innerbelt.org/Presentations/071906Lakefront/LakefrontPublicMtgJuly19_files/frame.htm
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on July 20, 2006, 08:30:58 AM
^And you did a fine job of it... I didn't even know there was a baby there.

As some of you may know, I am a big proponent of the modern roundabout. I was bothered that the concept was removed from the Lake/Clifton/West interections. I think that is one of the most perfect areas for one. I was, intrigued that they would suggest placing one at the Wetr 25th/Detroit intersection. I actually do not hink that would be a good area for one.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 20, 2006, 08:40:17 AM
^From what I heard, most people didn't like the W.25th/Detroit roundabout. I think that would be completely unnecessary and complicate pedestrian and traffic patterns.

I'm totally in love with the plans for upper Edgewater. There is one option that for some reason creates a new access road--well that's pretty stupid. The other ones remove the Lake Ave access roads and add a lot of space to the park. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 20, 2006, 09:07:05 AM
I was only there for about an hour and managed to get pretty overwhelmed in that small amount of time.  With bossy newsmen telling me to move and 200 onlookers, it was tough to get in there and really examine the options.  The ODOT reps were very helpful if you could get their ear, but the whole thing was just a little too "busy."

That's obviously not the fault of ODOT, but my other issue could be.  The maps were pretty much just overhead shots with a bunch of lines and alternatives.  It would've been very helpful to have a zoomed out aerial at every station, as well as more elevations.  It was tough to really comprehend the terrain and where roads and trails were leading under the setup they brought.

Anyway, I couldn't stay, so I'm planning to study the plans with more time and perhaps propose an alternative or two that are not listed.  They kept saying that these were just the first set of ideas that had been put forward by a number of interests, so if they try to pull any Central Interchange stuff on us and tell us that "these are the only options..." well, I'm going to have to take somebody down!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on July 20, 2006, 09:15:50 AM
MGD, it got a lot better after the lecture was over... there was more time to look at the maps and ask questions of the ODOT officials. It was cool that they had ballots for people to vote on different plans. Whether they'll actually pay attention to the results, who knows. I hope so.

During the official Q&A session after the Powerpoint, someone commented that the plan suffers from a lack of overall vision for how it will benefit the city as a whole, as well as individual neighborhoods and the lakefront. Is this about just making a freeway into a boulevard, with little attention to streetscape and design? If so, it may have minimal impact. The same issue was raised during the Innerbelt trench meeting I attended a few months ago.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 20, 2006, 09:41:10 AM
During the official Q&A session after the Powerpoint, someone commented that the plan suffers from a lack of overall vision for how it will benefit the city as a whole, as well as individual neighborhoods and the lakefront. Is this about just making a freeway into a boulevard, with little attention to streetscape and design? If so, it may have minimal impact.

I really didn't follow that comment at all. Isn't the project all about paying attention to the city as a whole as well as the individual neighborhoods???  Besides some of the alternatives, the only thing that I didn't like is that they would take the neighbor of Linda's Suprette to widen W.28th.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on July 20, 2006, 09:42:15 AM
MGD,

The lecture portion really helped me understand all the different maps. I left having a pretty clear feeling about what I would like to see happen.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 20, 2006, 10:21:23 AM
^well, we'll have to have a little catch-up session later after we watch Rachel Ray!

I think it's the City of Cleveland's responsibility to ensure that ODOT's plans feed into a larger community-based and citywide planning process.  That's what the Lakefront Plan was designed to be, so city planners and community leaders have to press really hard to make sure that those aims and objectives are met through this project.  I didn't get the sense, during my hour there, that this was apparent, but I know that the effort is there somewhere and I don't believe that city leaders are going to let it slip away.  The fact that three city council people and many other neighborhood representatives (plus residents and business owners) were present and involved gives me confidence.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on July 20, 2006, 10:25:58 PM
The next meeting is August 8 at St. Thomas Luthern on Lake Avenue.
This is more of a block meeting, but anyone is encouraged to come.

The next big public meetin, which "should" have better renderings then the line plots they had yesterday, will be in the fall.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CtownD on July 24, 2006, 05:51:57 PM
I'm not sure if anyone here is familiar with the Lakewood Observer, which is a volunteer (?) newspaper that reports on the city of Lakewood.  On their website (www.lakewoodobserver.com) they host a message board called the Observation Deck.  The reason I bring this up on this particular post is that as of the past couple of days there has been a pretty impressive display of NIMBYism regarding the Shoreway project (there are also a few supportive individuals).  Needless to say there are some pretty offensive generalizations made regarding the populace of the near West Side of Cleveland.  I am in the midst of trying to find figures regarding income growth for Detroit Shoreway to post on there, but in the mean time if anyone interested would like to take a look it was interesting to say the least.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 18, 2006, 07:40:41 PM
This was posted on another forum, but is worth posting here, too...

Any ideas for convincing ODOT that the intersection designs for the
shoreway boulevard don't have to be massive? Any good examples of
projects in Cleveland, Ohio or elsewhere that have used pedestrian
friendly / new urbanist street standards, especially where there are
large numbers of large trucks involved? I am particularly concerned
about the proposed intersection at W28th and Detroit. Both currently
proposed options wipe out a couple of historic buildings in the
landmark district so Detroit Ave can be widened - seems like a bad
precedent. Anybody want to join me in pressing this issue at the next
public meeting on the Shoreway Sept 27th at 5:30 at Mt. Carmel Church
on Detroit Ave?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on September 18, 2006, 07:44:50 PM
If I'm not working I'll try to be there.  I don't know of any examples that would be convincing offhand, though.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: peabody99 on September 18, 2006, 07:54:10 PM
This was posted on another forum, but is worth posting here, too...

Any ideas for convincing ODOT that the intersection designs for the
shoreway boulevard don't have to be massive? Any good examples of
projects in Cleveland, Ohio or elsewhere that have used pedestrian
friendly / new urbanist street standards, especially where there are
large numbers of large trucks involved? I am particularly concerned
about the proposed intersection at W28th and Detroit. Both currently
proposed options wipe out a couple of historic buildings in the
landmark district so Detroit Ave can be widened - seems like a bad
precedent. Anybody want to join me in pressing this issue at the next
public meeting on the Shoreway Sept 27th at 5:30 at Mt. Carmel Church
on Detroit Ave?

  I would like to be there but need to get educated before I go.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on September 19, 2006, 07:37:54 AM
I am particularly concerned about the proposed intersection at W28th and Detroit. Both currently
proposed options wipe out a couple of historic buildings in the landmark district so Detroit Ave can be widened - seems like a bad precedent. Anybody want to join me in pressing this issue at the next public meeting on the Shoreway Sept 27th at 5:30 at Mt. Carmel Church on Detroit Ave?

That issue was raised at the last public meeting by Mandy Metcalf of the Cleveland Ecovillage (she works out of Detroit-Shoreway's office), during the Q&A section. Hebebrand & Co. didn't respond to her point at all -- quite disappointing. You may want to contact her, or seek her out at the next meeting if you know her.

My theory is that Cimperman and/or other neighborhood groups pressured ODOT to take those two buildings. One is Linda's Superette, which is notorious for drug-related activity -- and if you're going to widen the road as an excuse to take it, you also have to take the Jamestown building. Only the latter is worth saving, IMO, but it is quite a beauty. If I'm at the next meeting I'll certainly be on your side!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on September 19, 2006, 07:47:55 AM
Why would Cimperman pressure ODOT to take the Jamestown building?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on September 19, 2006, 07:55:51 AM
How frickin' wide do they need Detroit to be, anyway?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on September 19, 2006, 09:05:31 AM
^^No, I think he/others pressured them to take Linda's Superette, and then Jamestown gets lost in the process. (You couldn't widen Detroit without taking both buildings.)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on September 19, 2006, 09:10:57 AM
Did they give a reason why Detroit needs to be widened?  Sure doesn't seem like it needs any further expansion.

On the other hand, if its not widened, do we lose an interesection at 28th? Does the roadway not come down to grade?  Before I make a fuss about losing the building, I want to know all the ramifications. (kind of like fighting for a bikelane only to lose an entire block of vintage buildings on Euclid at 55th).
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on September 19, 2006, 09:38:15 AM
^This brings us full circle -- I think the widening is a ruse for taking Linda's Superette (which then leads to Jamestown coming down). Just a theory. I, too, would be interested in hearing any other reasons the street would "need" to be wider by ODOT's reckoning.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 19, 2006, 05:47:09 PM
How frickin' wide do they need Detroit to be, anyway?

I guess it has to be a hugely wide road, given all the traffic that clogs the road!

Of course, the road isn't busy. But even it were, when do these guys realize that the way to reduce traffic volumes is to reduce throughput capacity. Narrow the road. Add traffic calming. Preserve and promote high-density, walkable neighborhoods. I know these things aren't in ODOT's lexicon, but the 1950s have been over for a long time, and it's long past time to rewire the institutionalized thinking over there.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on September 20, 2006, 09:35:40 AM
Hopefully Proctor and his ilk will be gone soon
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on September 20, 2006, 09:41:54 AM
Sure looks like they will be gone. Strickland has a huge lead over Blackwell.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 20, 2006, 11:05:57 AM
Hopefully Proctor and his ilk will be gone soon

But the "corporate culture" at ODOT may take many years to change. There are civil service folks at ODOT whose ideas are literally set in concrete.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on September 20, 2006, 11:07:55 AM
KJP for ODOT director! 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 20, 2006, 11:15:37 AM
There would be a mutiny and I would probably dumped in Lake Erie wearing cement shoes.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on September 20, 2006, 02:49:05 PM
Sure looks like they will be gone. Strickland has a huge lead over Blackwell.

Do we have any idea where Strickland stands on issues of urban development and transportation?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on September 21, 2006, 08:43:13 AM
Quote
Lakefront West - Public Meeting Notice

Please be advised that there will be a public meeting to discuss the Lakefront West project on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 from 5:30 PM to 8:00 PM at Our Lady of Mount Carmel School, 1355 West 70th Street. 

For additional information, please visit our website: www.innerbelt.org (http://www.innerbelt.org) and click on the Lakefront West icon.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on September 27, 2006, 08:14:00 AM
A reminder about the meeting tonight.

State to air plans for Shoreway
ODOT, city seeking public opinion tonight

Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

Neighborhood pressure and a limited budget are shaping the West Shoreway-to-boulevard conversion, which is in its final planning stages.

The Ohio Department of Transportation tonight will unveil favored options for improved lake access along the Shoreway, including three new intersections.

ODOT and city officials want to hear what the public thinks during a meeting from 6 to 8 p.m. at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church West, 1355 West 70th St...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Mov2Ohio on September 27, 2006, 10:01:51 AM
After reading this thread I still have a question. Does this project get rid of the Main avenue Bridge completely and replace it with a low level bridge, like it was pre-Main ave. bridge? Or will the Main Avenue Bridge stay in tact?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 27, 2006, 10:11:38 AM
The bridge stays intact. Even future phases keep most of the bridge. Only the eastern portion, roughly east of West 9th Street, could be replaced with a street-level right of way.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: noozer on September 27, 2006, 12:16:10 PM
Public can question Shoreway project
Cleveland Plain Dealer

The public can offer its opinion tonight on a plan to turn the West Shoreway from a divided highway into a boulevard with intersections, a grass median and bike and hike trails.

The Ohio Department of Transportation is planning up to $50 million in renovations to the road, which connects downtown Cleveland to the Edgewater Park area.

By removing ramps near the park, the park would grow by about 10 acres. The speed limit on the road would be reduced from 50 mph to 35 mph.

ODOT has a special Web site set up regarding the project at http://www.innerbelt.org/Lakefrontwest/Lakefronthome.htm

The public meeting will be at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church West, 1355 West 70th St.

Doors open at 5:30 p.m. A one-hour presentation begins at 6 p.m. Then there will be a question-and-answer session from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on September 27, 2006, 12:34:03 PM
Merge alert.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: noozer on September 27, 2006, 01:30:27 PM
To X:  I understand that Strickland has spoken favorably about the Ohio Hub Plan and has stated we need to improve rail service to move more people and freight.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Vulpster03 on September 27, 2006, 04:22:27 PM
It would be extremely expensive to replace the bridge, and the bridge poses a huge inconvenience to the ideal shoreway boulevard plan. This is what I overheard from a drunk guy at a bar downtown who worked at the Downtown Cleveland Alliance. I know he worked there, but I don't know how credible he was. He was also talking a lot about how Jane Campbell was a closeted lesbian.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 8ShadesofGray on September 28, 2006, 08:30:53 AM
Did anyone attend the meeting?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on September 28, 2006, 08:38:27 AM
I went, but had to leave early.  No comments as of now. Maybe later on today.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on September 28, 2006, 08:42:40 AM
"He was also talking a lot about how Jane Campbell was a closeted lesbian."

That added absolutely nothing to your post or this thread and is completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on September 28, 2006, 02:13:39 PM
^Besides, she's not in the closet.
 :-D
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on September 28, 2006, 02:38:11 PM
I was there.  I think that ODOT goes through a lot of contortions because they seem to think that because their model shows that there will be a traffic flow that they have to accomodate it.  There are at least a couple of problems with their alternative analysis that would be cleared up easily(I think) if instead of accomodating a movement that is undesirable, they discouraged it.  For example, they say they don't want to much commuter traffic moving down Lake because of the negative impact on the residents, but they widen the road, add turn lanes, and have on street parking be off limits at peak hours.  Or alternately, they use a messy two road solution.  Instead, they should divert traffic onto Clifton and calm that which remains on Lake by narrowing the street, or even close it off to through traffic at peak hours.  The W. 28th St. intersection is more problematic, but I think that if they think outside of this mental box they could fix that as well.  I made these comments to them, but was more or less blown off.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on October 30, 2006, 08:19:57 AM
This could have gone in a number of threads... maybe even its own. Regardless, I thought this was interesting.

From the New York Times:

Quote
A City’s Waterfront: A Place for People or Traffic?
By KEITH SCHNEIDER

SEATTLE

THE din along this city’s waterfront does not come only from the procession of cars and trucks on the Alaskan Way Viaduct, an elevated highway over Elliott Bay that carries more than 105,000 vehicles a day. It also comes from the tumultuous civic dispute over a multibillion-dollar repair project involving the highway and the shoreline.

In February 2001, Seattle was struck by the 6.8-magnitude Nisqually earthquake, which severely damaged the 53-year-old viaduct and the seawall holding it up.

Everybody agrees that the seawall must be rebuilt, at a cost of roughly $1 billion. But in the nearly six years since the earthquake, the debate over what to do about the highway has grown more complex. Assertions by traffic engineers about the highway’s central place in the region’s transportation network — it carries a fifth of Seattle’s north-south traffic — are colliding with new ideas about building a waterfront park above a six-lane tunnel, replacing the viaduct with a new one or building a park and a boulevard with no shoreline highway at all.

The argument reflects the shifts that are occurring as American cities invest in infrastructure to become more economically competitive. Seattle is the latest city to weigh the value of replacing a 20th-century symbol of driving efficiency, designed to serve cars, with parks and boulevards, designed to enrich the human experience.

“Imagine our waterfront without the noise, blight and dirt from a nearby elevated freeway,” wrote Greg Nickels, Seattle’s mayor, in a 2004 article in The Seattle Times. “Imagine walking along the waterfront and actually hearing the words of the person next to you, or hearing the cry of a seagull and the splash of the waves instead of rush hour.”

Essentially, Seattle has three options.

One proposal, preferred by the speaker of the State Legislature, is to build a new and bigger elevated highway for about $3.3 billion.

Another proposal, backed by the mayor and the City Council, is to build a six-lane tunnel, a shoreline boulevard and a waterfront park for about $5.5 billion, a plan supported by several of the city’s most influential business and neighborhood groups.

The population of Seattle, about 573,000, and surrounding King County, about 1.8 million, is growing fast. Demographers and economists expect downtown Seattle to add 56,000 new residents and 69,000 more jobs by 2020. “The city’s proposal for the Alaskan Way Tunnel is a three-for,” said Grace Crunican, director of the city’s Department of Transportation. “The tunnel meets our transportation needs. We get a new seawall. And we get our waterfront back.”

The third idea, pursued by a citizens’ group, the People’s Waterfront Coalition, is to tear down the old highway, build a waterfront park and smaller boulevard, increase transit service and modernize existing streets.

The coalition’s proposal is based to some extent on the success of other cities, particularly San Francisco and Portland, Ore., which have replaced highways with waterfront parks and transit investments, and generated population gains and new economic vitality in neighborhoods once divided by highways. The coalition emphasizes one more point about its proposal — its cost, which is under $1 billion.

“The question before us is, Can an American city voluntarily get rid of a moderately significant link in its transportation grid?” said Clark Williams-Derry, 38, research director at Sightline Institute, a research center in Seattle, who helped the coalition refine its proposal. “Can it be done politically? Can it be done substantively? What’s clear is that it can be done substantively.”

When it was opened in 1953, the 2.2-mile-long viaduct represented the country’s economic development priorities, providing drivers efficient routes from the central city to growing suburbs. Similar shoreline freeways were built in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Portland, Cleveland and other cities.

But in the early years of the 21st century, Seattle’s old wall of concrete has come to be viewed as a barrier to the city’s quality of life. The viaduct has been accused of various civic offenses, including separating residents from easy access to natural resources, especially a spectacular shoreline.

“No one in the civilized world would build a double-decker freeway now on their beautiful waterfront if they had a good choice, which we do,” said Sally Bagshaw, a lawyer, downtown resident and co-author of a report describing various plans for replacing the viaduct with a tunnel and waterfront park.

But what Ms. Bagshaw calls a no-brainer is viewed as a potential calamity by many merchants in Pioneer Square, the historic section of Seattle close to the viaduct. “The people I know aren’t ready to swallow a tunnel,” said John Siscoe, who owns the Globe Bookstore, citing cost overruns and delays experienced during Boston’s $14.6 billion tunneling project known as the Big Dig. “Oh, boy, what a mess we would be buying. Of all the options, we should forget the tunnel.”

Yet as city and state leaders argue over whether to build a tunnel or a new viaduct, the idea of doing neither seems to be gaining credence as the experiences of other cities that faced similar turning points are brought into the discussion. Cleveland is replacing the western section of its Memorial Shoreway, along Lake Erie, with a boulevard that is intended to spur development. Buffalo is debating whether to build a boulevard in place of its elevated Skyway along Lake Erie. Washington is considering demolishing its elevated Whitehurst Expressway to link Georgetown to a new park along the Potomac River.

Milwaukee has already done so. The city spent $45 million to tear down the East Park Thruway in 2003, restored the street grid beneath it and freed up nearly 20 acres of land on the north side. “The hardest part was convincing people that the highway wasn’t needed,” said John Norquist, a former mayor of Milwaukee and now president of the Congress for the New Urbanism, a design and planning group in Chicago. “What happens is that traffic, for the most part, redistributes. Drivers have brains. They find other ways to get around.”

Cary Moon, an engineer and planner who directs the People’s Waterfront Coalition from her downtown Seattle apartment, said that regardless of what is built, the viaduct would be coming down. For three or four years, there will be no highway at all along the waterfront. Seattle’s traffic management plan calls for new transit service, improving streets, installing street signals and encouraging people to find alternatives. The city’s plan is similar to the one proposed by Ms. Moon’s group. “We’re going to find out that’s all we really need,” she said.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Old AmrapinVA on October 30, 2006, 09:24:07 AM
I guess the folks in Seattle didn't see what a mess the "Big Dig" did to Boston, along with "Big Dig 2": the project making I-93 go underground through downtown. Of course that is Mass DOT. :)

I don't know Seattle that well so I'm wondering if the viaduct expwy. is that necessary. $1 billion sounds like another Big Dig debacle to me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on October 30, 2006, 09:56:35 AM
I guess the folks in Seattle didn't see what a mess the "Big Dig" did to Boston, along with "Big Dig 2": the project making I-93 go underground through downtown. Of course that is Mass DOT. :)

I don't know Seattle that well so I'm wondering if the viaduct expwy. is that necessary. $1 billion sounds like another Big Dig debacle to me.

Agreed!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on October 30, 2006, 11:12:59 AM
I imagine there second option would be very expensive do to implementing earthquake resistant construction.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 17, 2007, 08:19:41 PM
Got a postcard in the mail today saying there is a neighborhood meeting Thursday, Jan. 25 at St. Thomas Evangelical Lutheran Church, 9509 Lake Avenue, Cleveland.

They'll be presenting, discussing design options. Doors open at 5 p.m.Presentation at 6 p.m. and Q&A at 7 p.m.

http://www.innerbelt.org/lakefrontwest/lakefronthome.htm (http://www.innerbelt.org/lakefrontwest/lakefronthome.htm)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 23, 2007, 09:53:51 PM
See the blurb about the public hearing on Thursday, after my diatribe ...

Check out the visuals in the Jan. 11 PowerPoint presentation at:
http://www.innerbelt.org/Lakefrontwest/Lakefronthome.htm

Again, all but one of these looks like something suburban. Why is it wrong for traffic to go on the existing portion of Lake Avenue between West Boulevard and Clifton? Instead, most ODOT options would make Lake into a cul-de-sac or a marginal road like something in Mentor or Strongsville. If putting downtown bound traffic past existing Lake Avenue homes and driveways is OK west of West Boulevard, why isn't OK east of West Boulevard??   :weird:

________________________

DOT seeks comments on Lake Ave.-W. Boulevard intersection

11:53 a.m.

The public is invited to discuss plans for improving the intersection of Lake Avenue and West Boulevard. The Ohio Department of Transportation and city officials will present a design plan and seek comments at a meeting set for 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. Thursday at St. Thomas Evangelical Lutheran Church, 9509 Lake Avenue. ODOT and the city want to connect Cleveland's West Side neighborhoods to the lakefront by building multiple routes to Ohio 2, also known as the West Shoreway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 23, 2007, 09:59:13 PM
I went to a meeting for this last summer. Some Lake Ave people showed up and said that the entire project was stupid just because of its impact on their portion of Lake. Of course this is to be expected, but I certainly hope that ODOT doesn't feel that these people are in the majority.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 26, 2007, 05:45:27 AM
Bummer.....

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1169804348140120.xml&coll=2 (http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1169804348140120.xml&coll=2)

Residents prefer keeping ramps to enlarging Edgewater Park
Friday, January 26, 2007
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

Prospects of more green space at Edgewater Park appear to be losing to traffic fears in the Cudell and Edgewater neighborhoods.

Residents told the Ohio Department of Transportation and city planners last night they want to keep more of the West Shoreway ramps than early proposals called for in the Lakefront West project, a $65 million plan to convert the 50-mph Shoreway to a 35-mph boulevard by 2011...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 26, 2007, 07:38:14 AM
^^That's stupid because the minute you stick traffic lights on the Shoreway, all those Lakewood and Rocky River drivers are going to go a different route, imho.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on January 26, 2007, 07:42:06 AM
  I was at the meeting last night for a brief time (had to get back to the fire station) and I must say, after looking at all the proposals that were displayed, Westbrooks is the only one that made any sense.  Every plan that ODOT had on display looked as if it would make that area more of a clusterf*%K than it needed to be.  It just seemed as if the "improvements" would only make that area more dangerous for pedestrians and not really do anything except waste taxpayers money. 
  The short time I WAS there though, I did manage to ruffle the feathers of a few ODOTians.  I was one of the early ones there, so it was obvious that I was looking at each proposal before the presentation.  I was approached by a few people from ODOT and was asked which one I thought was best.  I LOVED watching the dismay when I answered they are ALL bad!  When asked why I came to this opinion, I stated that ODOT, RTA, and the city are really dropping the ball on this project by not including an alternative in the plan.  I went on to say that it seems EVERY plan that comes out to the public is ALWAYS an autocentric one.  If traffic reduction is a concern, what better way to reduce it than to reduce the numbers of cars using it.  (again..a puzzled look)  Stating that the Clifton corridor has MANY downtown employees living within a few blocks, and that Clifton once did, and still can ac comadate rail lines, why wasn't this part of the plan?  It would promote mass transit (in an area that people actually live and is highly visible...unlike the WFL and Red line), reduce the number of cars using the corridor, and relieve parking needs downtown as well.  Here are the answers I received in response.....
1) People won't ride trains...there is already enough problems getting people to use the BUS!  my response: because busses can be cramped during rush hour and unlike trains...a bus is STILL in the same traffic that you are trying to relieve.

2)Rail lines are very expensive to initiate ME:  maybe Ohio should look to Portland, St Louis, and Pittsburgh to see how they are funding their efforts

3) There may be plans for BRT in the future ME: isn't that still a bus...that still waits in traffic?

4) Finally, Westbrook overheard my concerns and stated that there is talk of a commuter rail line but that it would be WAY down the road.  I asked if he was referring to the Lorain/Cleveland line...(he seemed almost shocked that I knew of it)  He asked if I needed any web links to read up on it, I thanked him and politely said yes, but I also said there is PLENTY of info on a site that I have been reading for some time called Urbanohio.com   He was like hmmmmm....never heard of that one.

  Just about that time I threw up in my mouth and decided I had better return to the station.  My efforts were like trying to explain trigonometry to my brothers third grade class.  How sad!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: blinker12 on January 26, 2007, 07:53:24 AM
We are stuck in the 1960s.

BTW, why would there be ramps onto a boulevard??
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 26, 2007, 08:03:04 AM
Nimby nimby nimby!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 26, 2007, 09:26:47 AM
JDD941, thanks for the plug on commuter rail. ODOT officials better start talking alternatives to the car and better land use, or else Strickland's people are going to transfer them to trash pickup duty along the highways. Or worse -- the unemployment line. Two of ODOT's non-deputy director managers in Columbus were already canned when they told Strickland's honchos that they didn't agree with the guv's new fix-it-first and alternative transportation policies.

Message: Get in line behind the governor or get in the unemployment line.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on January 26, 2007, 11:11:32 AM
I actually JUST went to the Strickland website and posted MY concerns about alternative transportation (and of course pimped out Urbanohio)...it will be interesting to see if I get any sort of response.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 26, 2007, 11:22:17 AM
Man, can you imagine if rail even ENTERED the discussion? How can you be a department of transportation and only talk about cars/trucks?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 26, 2007, 11:24:31 AM
JDD,

do you have a link for the website?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on January 26, 2007, 11:40:43 AM
http://governor.ohio.gov/   then go to constituent affairs...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bizbiz on January 27, 2007, 04:42:20 PM
This entire plan, is going to either do a lot of good or a lot of bad. I change my mind almost daily on whether I support it or not. One way for me to support this would be if the entire BLVD is lined with highrises similar to that of the QEW headed into Toronto. As you enter the city, their shoreway is lined on both sides with new residential towers that continue to replace a previously stale part of the city. The premise is perfect, but is the land that will be opened up to development going to be used sparingly and effectively or is it just going to be 20-30 mansions with big backyards overlooking the Lake/park below? I'd rather see this become a counterpart to the Gold Coast. It's a once-in-a-lifetime chance to develop some lakefront (or almost lakefront) land PROPERLY! Regardless of the cutesy little color coded maps that show proposed density levels along this new BLVD, I would really like to see it developed as densely as possible in entirety.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 29, 2007, 02:00:39 PM
it wouldn't be lined with high rises for a good long time. I am surprised at the backlash.  This project will do wonders for Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway.  I understand why some Clifton and Lakewood folk would be against it.  But why let some NIMBYs get in the way of a project that will help bring investment into the city and improve neighborhoods??  It can be frustrating when the minority who are inconvenienced in a minor way try to stop a project that is a huge plus for the majority.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Florida Guy on January 29, 2007, 04:08:14 PM
^ Agreed. All though some will not be pleased, over all it is good for the city.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gavster on January 29, 2007, 05:13:36 PM
i live in lakewood and use the west shoreway to get to work every day. i understand that this will slow down my commute to work every day. i also realize how much valuable land this opens up for development and how much this will help the redevelopment of the detroit-shoreway neighborhood and am all for it. i just hope its done right.  also will the detroit-shoreway neighborhood label be changed to the detroit-edgewater neighborhood???  might help marketing i dunno
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on January 30, 2007, 08:44:47 AM
I am not against doing SOMETHING...but the plans that they displayed at the meeting were completely ridiculous.  It stretched from West Blvd to the Lake/Clifton intersection....and from what I saw...it didn nothing to help traffic.  it isn't a matter of being a "NIMBY"...it is a matter of doing something that makes sense.  In fact the plans didn't even address new construction...it said it would add 9 acres to the park.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: mrnyc on January 30, 2007, 09:32:56 AM
http://governor.ohio.gov/   then go to constituent affairs...

i did, i'll let you know if i get a reply.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on January 30, 2007, 11:21:18 AM
^ I haven't yet....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on January 30, 2007, 01:45:22 PM
i live in lakewood and use the west shoreway to get to work every day. i understand that this will slow down my commute to work every day. i also realize how much valuable land this opens up for development and how much this will help the redevelopment of the detroit-shoreway neighborhood and am all for it. i just hope its done right.  also will the detroit-shoreway neighborhood label be changed to the detroit-edgewater neighborhood???  might help marketing i dunno

Your in the minority. Any and all of the Lakewoodians I have ever talked with hate it. Sucks to be them.
I don't think they will change the name of Detroit-Shoreway. Edgewater is already it's own neighborhood.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 30, 2007, 01:57:53 PM
Yeah, the Lakewood people seem irritated. I also commute from the Edgewater/Cove area of Lakewood. By the time this gets into high construction, I hope to have a place on the Rapid line!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 30, 2007, 04:15:27 PM
Your in the minority. Any and all of the Lakewoodians I have ever talked with hate it. Sucks to be them.

You didn't ask me!  :wink:

Let's see.... West Shoreway-to-boulevard conversion work starting in late 2009. Inner Belt reconstruction getting into high-gear at or near that time. Clifton Boulevard reconstruction starting either this year or next. Anything else I'm missing?

How do you spell relief? R-A-I-L ...as in West Shore Corridor commuter rail!

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gavster on January 30, 2007, 04:20:53 PM
i would love for that to happen....im with ya....also a lakewoodite
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bizbiz on February 02, 2007, 03:40:30 PM
I live on Clifton in Lakewood and work downtown. As I said before, I am still not sure how I feel about all of this. It will slow my commute to work. Bad. But it will open new opportunities to the city. Good. But before I can accept or not accept this plan, I have a few questions I would love to ask the city, ODOT, and the people who are soooo supportive of the changes:

1. We are hearing about opening up land for development as a result of the West Shoreway rehab. Who's to say this land will be developed? We have land ALL OVER the city that is prime land for development and it's been prime land since the beginning of time. Think of parking lots in Public Square, empty buildings on Euclid, beautiful views of the city and Lake Erie from Lakeside Avenue which are just fields of weeds surrounded by industrial wastelands. I could go on, but you get the drift. So who's to say that this new land will be developed? Suppose it just sits there and nothing happens? Where is the committment from developers? Who is interested in this land? Is anybody? Or is this all "hopes and dreams"?

2. We're hearing about extra land added to Edgewater Park. Will this land be used effectively or will it just become grass?

3. If the city of Cleveland hasn't abolished red light and speed cameras by the time this project is completed, how many of these can we expect to see lining the new boulevard?

4. By taking away a mass transit highway and turning it into a 35-mph zone, we must assume that this new boulevard will literally be swamped by traffic. The people in the Edgewater neighborhood, Lakewood, and Rocky River won't just suddenly dissapear. They'll be eager to speed in this new zone. Howabout decreasing traffic and congestions by creating a Rapid Transit that runs from downtown all the way thru Lakewood along Clifton? Why not? We have 50 million for this and 100 million for that. What's stopping a rapid transit besides cash flow? Is there anyone that thinks a boulevard would trigger eco. development but a rapid transit wouldn't? So why spend x amount of dollars on this W. Shoreway plan knowing that a rapid line would definately seal the deal!?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on February 02, 2007, 05:28:14 PM
^ see my post ealier on this page...(7th down)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on February 02, 2007, 05:59:41 PM
Well, it's Cleveland's portion of the road, right? I don't see how it benefits them if people from Rocky River and Lakewood can buzz in and out of the city in 10 minutes.

I agree with you regarding the light rail options, of course. In progressive places, rail is always at least part of the discussion and here it's off the table.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on February 02, 2007, 06:11:57 PM
There are no guarantees about development happening anywhere. But I can guarantee where development WON'T happen -- next to a 50-mph limited access highway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on February 02, 2007, 08:39:19 PM
^well a 50 mph hour highway hasn't stopped development in other cities. 

it's one of the reasons i'm excited by jackson's focus on getting the city fixed.  people have choices where to live, and in this region the cost and hassle (brownfields, city politics, pollution, jobs in suburbs, schools, etc) of developing and living on this land has long outweighed what many of us view as prime development land - views, location, amenities, etc.

i think that we MUST demand that a rail line in incorporated into this project.  we owe it to ourselves to start re-building the city for the future and not the past.   otherwise, it is a huge lost opportunity. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on February 02, 2007, 08:44:12 PM
^well a 50 mph hour highway hasn't stopped development in other cities. 

Let me rephrase. How many 50 mph limited-access highways have condos where you can pull out of a drivewalk or sidestreet onto the highway? Or walk out of your condo to take a stroll along the highway?

Development is occurring along access roads to limited-access highways, but not on the highways themselves. The reason is a limited-access highway, even in its most minimal form (see Route 8 between I-271 and SR303) is not feasible. And if more access roads are added to the highway to reach any new developments, then it's no longer limited access.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: j73 on February 04, 2007, 01:34:02 PM
^well a 50 mph hour highway hasn't stopped development in other cities. 

it's one of the reasons i'm excited by jackson's focus on getting the city fixed.  people have choices where to live, and in this region the cost and hassle (brownfields, city politics, pollution, jobs in suburbs, schools, etc) of developing and living on this land has long outweighed what many of us view as prime development land - views, location, amenities, etc.

i think that we MUST demand that a rail line in incorporated into this project.  we owe it to ourselves to start re-building the city for the future and not the past.   otherwise, it is a huge lost opportunity. 

I'm not an expert on this (KJP can probably help), but wouldn't it seem to make sense to extend the green line across the Detroit-Superior bridge (on the lower level) and then run it out either along Detroit or as part of this project, maybe ending in downtown Rocky River?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on February 04, 2007, 01:46:40 PM
See the following link for the project I'm working on...

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=6001.0
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: FrqntFlyr on March 27, 2007, 08:25:01 AM
Noozer posted this article in the Innerbelt thread (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=2438.630 (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=2438.630)). 
As it is more related to this existing Shoreway thread, I'm reposting here.


Traffic flow gets priority in plan to transform West Shoreway
Proposal's favored option would create less new parkland
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

Keeping commuters happy won out over more parkland near Edgewater Park in the plans to transform the West Shoreway into a slower-speed boulevard.

Community leaders agreed last week to use an existing ramp to move traffic to and from the west end of the boulevard...

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1174985159116020.xml&coll=2 (http://www.cleveland.com/metro/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1174985159116020.xml&coll=2)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jax on March 27, 2007, 08:43:38 AM
I haven't really been following the thread, but it seems to me that the consultants are discounting commuters' ability to, oh I don't know, find another route downtown? If they were all robot-like automata incapable of adapting, then perhaps I could see their point.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on March 27, 2007, 10:02:40 AM
^That's what I was thinking...

Also, this seems to me to indicate that light rail or BRT has to be a part of this project.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: JDD941 on March 27, 2007, 01:37:28 PM
^ Unfortunately..it's not part of the project.  I was at the West Shoreway meeting a while back and suggested that rail would be a great alternative to reduce traffic....but I guess when I mentioned this I must have grown three heads with the looks I got from the ODOT "planners....it made me sick!  Even Westbrook shrugged it off and said that there have been talks of rail, and suggested I contact the people in charge of the Cleveland/Lorain rail project.  Nothing, however, seems to be in the near future for the shoreway project.  Evey plan that was shown at the meeting was all based around autos...too bad....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 27, 2007, 01:48:14 PM
The problem is the people turning right onto Lake at the evening rush hours?  Here's a solution, and it would cost a heck of a lot less than millions:

A sign at the Clifton/Lake intersection saying "No right turn: local traffic only 4-7 pm." 

If inbound morning traffic becomes an issue, place a sign at the entrance to Lake at the Lake/West Blvd saying "Do not enter; local traffic only 6-10 AM". 

Perhaps add a few speed bumps, narrow the lanes, and allow street parking on both sides at all times.

I haven't really been following the thread, but it seems to me that the consultants are discounting commuters' ability to, oh I don't know, find another route downtown? If they were all robot-like automata incapable of adapting, then perhaps I could see their point.

Yes, that is half of ODOT's problem; the other half is that they are robot like automata incapable of adapting.  They don't stop to think of if there is a better way to reroute traffic flows around a troublespot, instead they see themselves as only reacting to the traffic flows their models show.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on March 27, 2007, 02:32:15 PM
BRT, bus lanes or something has to be a part of this discussion! Everyday, the 55 buses go down Clifton and Lake and they are JAM PACKED! If it's going to go from 15 minutes to 30 minutes to get to work with the Shoreway all bottled up, those people, imho, are going to take they cars on 90...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: smackem81 on March 27, 2007, 03:08:31 PM
Something simple as BUS only lanes during rush AM/PM hour periods on the curb lanes would be way for gradual slide into having dedicated BRT in the future.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on March 27, 2007, 04:04:18 PM
When is the "gold" line starting?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 27, 2007, 08:57:54 PM
Don't limit your venting to this forum. Tell your elected officials what you think! Write letters to the editor of the newspapers! This shit will continue if the powerbrokers believe they have no reason to cause change.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on March 31, 2007, 06:39:46 AM
Yay City Planning Commission.
Boo City Council.

Wish I could've been there.

Quote
Shoreway plan riles West Side leaders
Panel wants to eliminate ramps

Saturday, March 31, 2007
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

The Cleveland City Planning Commission infuriated West Side leaders Friday by adopting a street plan that yields more green space at Edgewater Park but would leave nearby neighbors and commuters battling heavier traffic.

A livid Councilman Jay Westbrook called the commission's 5-2 vote "a dagger in the heart of the community."

At issue are plans to convert the 3-mile West Shoreway into a slower speed boulevard by late 2011.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: FrqntFlyr on March 31, 2007, 07:01:54 AM
Merge alert.

I second the motion for a merge with the other Shoreway thread.
http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=4526.0
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: FrqntFlyr on March 31, 2007, 07:04:25 AM
^^Cool news.  Maybe the Planning Commission's move will force ODOT and Council to think creatively about how to incorporate transit and other methods to reduce traffic.  But somehow I have a feeling that Council will just b**ch and moan until they get what they want.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on March 31, 2007, 07:45:12 AM
Please write letters to city council, especially Jay Westbrook.  Tell him that rush hour traffic belongs on I-90 and not through Edgewater Park.


Shoreway plan riles West Side leaders
Panel wants to eliminate ramps
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

The Cleveland City Planning Commission infuriated West Side leaders Friday by adopting a street plan that yields more green space at Edgewater Park but would leave nearby neighbors and commuters battling heavier traffic.

A livid Councilman Jay Westbrook called the commission's 5-2 vote "a dagger in the heart of the community."

At issue are plans to convert the 3-mile West Shoreway into a slower speed boulevard by late 2011...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 31, 2007, 08:02:27 AM
Westbrook's quote about Ronayne is low. The guy lives two blocks from the park, he's allowed to comment on the plan.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 31, 2007, 08:06:21 AM
Not to mention that Ronayne was the one who led the Lakefront Planning process in the first place.  This is the thing I hate about Councilpeople- they tend to be very NIMBY driven.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jax on March 31, 2007, 08:23:46 AM
And refusing to shake his hand? Wow, talk about a Grumpy Gus. I think somebody needs some time-out time in the corner!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 31, 2007, 08:25:31 AM
If you want to get behind the Planning Commission's vote, speak up. There's no such thing as silence, as someone else's voice will surely fill the void you leave.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on March 31, 2007, 09:31:25 AM
So this one intersecetion might "teeter" on failure for a half hour each morning?  I'll take the extra parkland and $3M please.  I'm pretty impressed with the Commission on this one.  Our burg has way too many intersections over-engineered to ease the almighty rushour commute [the Detroit/W. 25th/DS Bridge one being my least favorite]...and it's not without cost.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on March 31, 2007, 10:24:55 AM
So am I to understand that some ramps will now not be built?  Which ramps would those be?  Which streets?

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 31, 2007, 11:37:04 AM
So am I to understand that some ramps will now not be built?  Which ramps would those be?  Which streets?

I think that City Council makes the ultimate call. I'll bet that they will ignore the planning commission on this one (unfortunately). City Council tends to respect the decision of the individual councilperson. Given that JC, Zone and Westbrook are all for the ramp option, I don't see council going against them.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 31, 2007, 08:02:03 PM
I'm disappointed with Joe Cimperman on this one. He knows that this isn't the best alternative, he's just going with it so that the other councilmen will help him out with something later on.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: mrnyc on April 09, 2007, 02:49:15 PM
i had sent an email to governor strickland's office, who replied and promised to forward my email along. well they did and i got a reply in the mail while i was off in london -- so here it is:


3/21/07

thank you for your recent email to governor stickland expressing your support for the cuyahoga u.s route 6/west shoreway project. your letter has been referred to this office for reply.

the trac will make a final decisin on the 2008-2013 major new program in may 2007. your comments are important and will be shared with the trac.

respectfully,
james g. beasley, director

trac (aka transportation review advisory council)
1980 w. broad st
columbus, ohio 43223
614-466-8963
614-887-4023 (fax)

no email? fax??? still, at least i got heard.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Mov2Ohio on April 09, 2007, 03:01:06 PM
^Got the exact letter in the mail this past week.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on April 12, 2007, 09:38:58 PM
Fortunately, they posted the full article at Cleveland.com, not the shortened version that appeared in the West Side Sun!
_______________

http://www.cleveland.com/sun/westsidesunnews/index.ssf?/base/news-0/117639694658340.xml&coll=3 (http://www.cleveland.com/sun/westsidesunnews/index.ssf?/base/news-0/117639694658340.xml&coll=3)

Shoreway standoff Residents disagree with city plans to remove ramps
Thursday, April 12, 2007
By Ken Prendergast
West Side Sun News

Two sides are at an impasse at the intersection of Clifton Boulevard, Lake Avenue and the West Shoreway.

On one side is Ward 18 Councilman Jay Westbrook and a number of residents in the affected area who want to keep highway ramps intact, linking Lake and the Shoreway. On the other side is the Cleveland Planning Commission, which wants them removed to open up more land for Edgewater Park and development.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on June 03, 2007, 03:16:08 PM
Don't know if this is related, but have you seen Lake Avenue from the Shoreway to W. 117? They took it down from four pseudo lanes to two with a turn lane in the middle. The traffic on tomorrow morning is probably going to be a big pain. To me, I don't see the point of this change. Anyone have any insight?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on June 03, 2007, 03:20:07 PM
^It seems to create a lot more order. It may be a pain, but it should be safer.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on June 03, 2007, 03:24:21 PM
Well, I personally hate it!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bizbiz on June 28, 2007, 12:57:56 PM
^ I second that! Has anyone noticed that lately on the Shoreway there's been some heavy rush hour traffic? It's getting backed up quite a bit. Unless the new boulevard is similar to Chester Avenue with 3 lanes in each direction, this is going to be a very difficult drive during rush hour.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gavster on June 28, 2007, 10:48:19 PM
its because Lake ave is only 2 lanes now
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 29, 2007, 09:30:52 AM
^ I second that! Has anyone noticed that lately on the Shoreway there's been some heavy rush hour traffic? It's getting backed up quite a bit. Unless the new boulevard is similar to Chester Avenue with 3 lanes in each direction, this is going to be a very difficult drive during rush hour.

Awesome. Bring on West Shore commuter rail!!

(Actually, I understand there will be three lanes in each direction. And the two lanes on Lake is to make clear that it's a two-lane road. I think I side goal is to push traffic over onto the much-wider Clifton Blvd.)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on July 03, 2007, 01:22:32 PM
Can someone post the article from Crain's about the Shoreway? The gist of the article is that the county engineer's office is requesting funds for lowering the Shoreway between West 9th and Browns Stadium to at least street level. Yes, an option under discussion is to put the Shoreway in a tunnel in the north end of the Warehouse District. I don't know how that can work, but the concern is that unless enough traffic can be diverted from the West Shoreway (cough, West Shore commuter rail, cough) to keep intersections from failing, then the Shoreway will have to remain grade-separated through downtown.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on July 03, 2007, 03:02:37 PM
To improve lake access in Warehouse District, officials study options for Shoreway
 
By JAY MILLER

4:30 am, July 2, 2007

Local planning and transportation officials want to study ways to connect the Warehouse District in downtown Cleveland more closely with the lakefront by bringing the Shoreway down to street level or below in the area between West Ninth and West Third streets.

One option for the Shoreway that the study would examine would be to drop down to street level the elevated highway that carries traffic from the west into downtown from the Main Avenue Bridge. Another option would divert that portion of the roadway underground via a tunnel along the northern portion of the Warehouse District.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on July 03, 2007, 06:01:02 PM
You da man!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on August 21, 2007, 12:25:04 PM
Plans for West Shoreway hit by rising costs and foggy data from the Ohio Department of Transportation
Posted by Steven Litt August 17, 2007 17:53PM
Categories: City Planning

A once-bold vision for the city's lakefront has stalled -- while delays are causing estimated costs to skyrocket.

Plans to revamp the West Shoreway have been stalled since March while Cleveland officials have debated whether to include ramps at the west end of the road, which connects downtown to the Edgewater-Cudell neighborhood and Edgewater Park on the city's West Side...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on August 21, 2007, 12:43:43 PM
Wasn't ODOT supposed to change under the new administration? 

ps: I know that's a cop-out answer, as I've done nothing personally to motivate change, but still...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on August 21, 2007, 12:49:38 PM
How would this affect the plans?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 8ShadesofGray on August 21, 2007, 01:00:13 PM
Quote from: Christopher Warren
"If we're forced to make a decision with respect to the ramps, they're really giving us only one choice. But we're not ready to throw in the towel on that yet."

I'm not sure I understand this. It may be an unpalatable situation to be trying to address the ramps issue within a short timeframe. But it seems to me that there are definitely two choices still available. Is he basically saying that the only choice would be to retain the ramps?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on August 21, 2007, 01:23:21 PM
I doubt it. If they keep the ramps, it adds about $3-4 million to the project because they'd completely rebuild them. Its cheaper just to eliminate them.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MorningTheft on August 21, 2007, 01:29:47 PM
I'm not questioning the numbers, but why does a one month delay add $400k to the budget?  Do the building materials rise in price that much?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: w28th on August 21, 2007, 02:26:00 PM
Cost of future materials sure as hell doesn't affect their position of building a new innerbelt bridge now, and one 50 years from now.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 21, 2007, 02:55:41 PM
Wasn't ODOT supposed to change under the new administration? 

It's a big bureaucracy. They move like glaciers.

I'm not questioning the numbers, but why does a one month delay add $400k to the budget?  Do the building materials rise in price that much?

Yes, they do. Especially in the last few years.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on August 21, 2007, 03:01:49 PM
Just over one month, though?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on August 21, 2007, 03:12:10 PM
^China, India and Russia are buying up all of the building materials in the world right now
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on August 21, 2007, 04:47:03 PM
Don't forget Dubai.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on September 10, 2007, 06:22:38 AM
Is it me, or has the construction on the house near the Westinghouse curve stalled/stopped?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jonmoxon on September 10, 2007, 10:57:13 AM
I drove by it saturday and it looked like some backfilling against the foundation had been done; the dozer was parked out front. I'm kind of curious as to what the slowdown/stoppage is all about also.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on October 30, 2007, 12:59:12 PM
Will this project actually happen?  Anyone have any scoop?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on January 25, 2008, 09:16:56 PM
So with a Dem in the governor's mansion we get more screwed by ODOT?

State says West Shoreway plan's unfeasible; city disagrees
Posted by Tom Breckenridge January 25, 2008 20:12PM
Categories: Impact, Traffic
The grand vision of turning the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard faces a scaled-back reality because of traffic and funding issues, state transportation officials say.

But frustrated city officials say they'll not let go of the dream -- converting a harsh, 50 mph highway to a 35 mph street and adding intersections, finally affording West siders direct access to Edgewater Park and the lakefront.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 25, 2008, 09:28:22 PM
OK, so Lakeshore Boulevard in Chicago has less traffic than the West Shoreway in Cleveland? I'd love to see some traffic data comparisons. If the traffic data is higher for Lakeshore Boulevard, then how come it can have intersections and we can't?

To me, this sounds like ODOT sticking to its highway engineering credo at the expense of what it takes to spur urban redevelopment. They are often mutually exclusive, at least where ODOT's predispositions are concerned. Now if ODOT was more progressive in understanding that better highway geometry for faster/higher volume traffic doesn't make for better urban neighborhoods, then maybe we'll get somewhere. And I suspect that last sentence of mine will be as understandable to an ODOT engineer as an ancient Egyptian trying to read HTML code.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on January 25, 2008, 09:43:06 PM
OK, so Lakeshore Boulevard in Chicago has less traffic than the West Shoreway in Cleveland? I'd love to see some traffic data comparisons. If the traffic data is higher for Lakeshore Boulevard, then how come it can have intersections and we can't?

another example is el camino real or middlefield road/central expresswaythat runs through silicon valley in california.  it is 35 to 45mph, is at least 7 lanes at each intersection (not including a large landscaped median), follows rail tracks (for caltrain), has multiple intersections, and carries a LOT of traffic without much disruption.  google has some good street views of this area:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=palo+alto&ie=UTF8&ll=37.403028,-122.107244&spn=0.013807,0.024633&z=15&om=0&layer=c&cbll=37.404608,-122.101017

cleveland (and ohio as a whole) needs to get on board with smarter traffic management systems - ie, smart traffic lights (don't hold a pedestrian cross sign for 45 seconds when no one is crossing, ability to determine if there is 1, 2, or 10 cars waiting to turn or cross and set timing appropriately)

edit: added link
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: redbrick on January 25, 2008, 10:46:21 PM
So with a Dem in the governor's mansion we get more screwed by ODOT?

Apologizes to our friends in central Ohio (I lived there for 12 years) but if this project was in Columbus it would have been done already. The Cleve is getting screwed here. The last major infrastructure project by ODOT in these parts, someone correct me if I'm wrong  -- the I-271 express lanes, started over 15 years ago, when we had a Clevelander in the governors mansion.

All our gas taxes here seem to go mainly for one thing -- adding lanes for the escape to the exurbs!!!

I mean holy crap, this is a no brainer and economic spin-off and (I'm just guessing) associated taxes from new development on a new lakefront boulevard would pay the city and state back in a very reasonable time frame. I know that's not part of the equation for ODOT...  :x
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on January 26, 2008, 11:16:18 AM
Apologizes to our friends in central Ohio (I lived there for 12 years) but if this project was in Columbus it would have been done already.

I dont agree.

I smell political posturing at play.  Something is really fishy.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on January 26, 2008, 04:21:08 PM
This says it all: 

ODOT says intersections planned for West 45th Street, West 54th/Division Avenue and West 73rd will create unacceptable traffic backups during rush hours.

God forbid we build communities that are nice for the 23 hours a day that aren't rush-hour.

I don't really understand this whole issue- can't Hebebrand just be ordered to accomodate the City's demands by the governor's office?  I'm going to go out on a limb and say Lee Fisher would probably side with the city on this.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 26, 2008, 09:32:45 PM
I suspect Fisher would too. There are people around him who also would see things the city's way and not ODOT's -- but only if they're not so buried with other tasks/issues that they're aware of what's going on. If they're made aware of what Hebebrand and his Old ODOT Posse are trying to do, then they can get Fisher and Director Beasely to put heat on Hebebrand and actually listen to the local government. Geez I hate these f*cking cementheads at ODOT.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BuckeyeB on January 27, 2008, 07:29:31 AM
So with a Dem in the governor's mansion we get more screwed by ODOT?

Apologizes to our friends in central Ohio (I lived there for 12 years) but if this project was in Columbus it would have been done already. The Cleve is getting screwed here. The last major infrastructure project by ODOT in these parts, someone correct me if I'm wrong  -- the I-271 express lanes, started over 15 years ago, when we had a Clevelander in the governors mansion.

All our gas taxes here seem to go mainly for one thing -- adding lanes for the escape to the exurbs!!!

I mean holy crap, this is a no brainer and economic spin-off and (I'm just guessing) associated taxes from new development on a new lakefront boulevard would pay the city and state back in a very reasonable time frame. I know that's not part of the equation for ODOT...  :x

Apologies accepted...but then I am originally from NE Ohio myself! As to Cleveburg getting screwed, look at it this way. Yes, Columbus has had a knack for getting way more than it's share of highway dollars, but what has that accomplished? A paved-over downtown, too much highway capacity and redundancy (take a look at I-270 near Easton), near-total auto dependence, sprawling suburbs, an emasculated public transit system. Some here wish we had been a bit less successful getting highway money!

As far as Cleveland goes, someone...and by this I mean the Mayor or other high-ranking official...should go to Lt. Gov. Fisher and press the case for conversion of the Shoreway. The city should be prepared to take over this highway and the air rights over the railroad tracks below and then promote a major development of this area. That could include a new intermodal hub directly connected with the Convention center, retail and new high-rise housing.

So the question becomes, how to get the Mayor involved. I would suggest that all those interested request an audience with the Mayor and city council to make the case to change the Shoreway to a boulevard and put the issue on the front burner. ODOT is going to do what ODOT always does, unless someone forces the issue.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: carolecohen on January 27, 2008, 12:51:18 PM
The question gets anwered to me; we miss out on federal monies because our govt peeps don't do the papework; we don't have enough of a connection between our local reps, including the Mayor, and the State. I always get the impression, and maybe it's just me, that fiefdoms here in Cleveland are more important to our local people than developing a long term network of brainstorming and negotiations with state and county officials.  Is it me or is this true? It's like the Bush Admn just calling Iraq evil etc and diplomacy going by the wayside.

If you can shed some light that proves me wrong I will be glad! 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: cle2032 on January 28, 2008, 01:17:22 PM
What a joke!

I absolutely hate when "traffic" is used as an excuse in this city for ANYTHING!  We don't have traffic!  A couple accidents during rush hours don't count either!  Has anyone EVER been stuck on the Shoreway or any freeway for the matter during the off-peak hours?  And by stuck I mean more than twice a year?  NO!  Hell, you can go to/from downtown/Strongsville during rush hour in the direction of rush hour traffic in 35 minutes easy.  I've commuted from B-tucky to downtown when I interned over summers and winters and only a handful of times was it "bad".  It doesn't take 90 minutes to go to Hopkins from downtown during rush hour OR  45 minutes to reach the end of the West Shoreway on a daily basis!

Why does ODOT care if it's 35 mph?   How will this really affect them down there?  This is just like the Innerbelt in that  projects meant to heal the divides created by massive infrastructure projects loose sight of the original intent!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on January 28, 2008, 01:27:48 PM
Overall I can agree.  However, I have been on 271/480 during a rush hour and it is bad.

Its been eons, since I've driven downtown during rush hour so I cant say what that drive is like during, but I can't imagine it being bad with all the Avenues and expressways we have.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DanB on January 28, 2008, 01:59:58 PM
The question gets anwered to me; we miss out on federal monies because our govt peeps don't do the papework; we don't have enough of a connection between our local reps, including the Mayor, and the State.

Is this enough of a connection?

Lee Fisher chooses Detroit Shoreway neighborhood
to announce candidacy for Lieutenant Governor

(Plain Press, February 2006) On Thursday January 26th, Ohio gubernatorial candidate Congressman Ted Strickland announced that former Ohio Attorney General and 1998 Democratic gubernatorial nominee Lee Fisher is his choice for Lieutenant Governor.

The announcement of Fisher’s candidacy was made at the Ward 17 Office of Councilman Matt Zone at W. 65th and Detroit Avenue. Until recently, the site served as the Zone Travel Agency, which Peggy Zone Fisher managed for over 30 years. Peggy Zone Fisher is married to Lee Fisher, and is Councilman Matt Zone’s brother.

In choosing Fisher as his running mate, Strickland said, “I wanted someone with experience with Cleveland, someone who would send a message that we are serious about moving this region forward.”

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 28, 2008, 02:05:47 PM
Outstanding find, DanB! I'll mention this to Matt this evening.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DanB on January 28, 2008, 02:08:53 PM
Probably not necessary, I'm sure he knows!!!   :-D
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on January 28, 2008, 03:17:40 PM
Has there been any hint that this could be delayed because the interbelt may have to be shut down.  This is purely speculation on my part, but it just seems so out of left field (now traffic studies show crazy tie ups). 
Maybe the innerbelt bridge is in poorer shape than originally thought, in light of the twin cities bridge collapse.

Like I said, pure speculation on my part.  Just wondering if anyone has heard anything of the sort.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 28, 2008, 05:26:40 PM
I'm not going to say I really care one way or the other, but I think if they put traffic lights on the Shoreway and reduce the speed limit to 35 mph, it's going to be a major, major change for rush hour commuters, which I guess is their primary concern. I've timed this before - I can get from Cove and Edgewater in Lakewood to Huron and E. 9th downtown in 15 minutes during rush hour. This is what people are going to bitch like all hell about because I'm assuming by adding lights and slowing down the speed limit, it'll be like going from downtown to University Circle on Chester during rush hour, which is a pain in the ass.

Perhaps there is a way to compromise? For example, from 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m. perhaps all the light blink yellow or something like that? I'm just trying to imagine how you'd handle that traffic volume because unless gas goes up to $10 a gallon, people are going to still drive downtown and there's no way you're going to take Detroit. That'd be infuriating.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on January 28, 2008, 05:35:09 PM
I think 35 is a little slow. Maybe 45 and it appears there will only be four light installed, correct?

I think LSB in Chicago works fine.  It should work fine for folks in metro Cleveland.  I don't believe that those living in the 'burbs should have a say in a development in Cleveland proper.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Mov2Ohio on January 28, 2008, 05:39:45 PM
I think the speed limit has to do with streets that have sidewalks. Streets with sidewalks have more pedestrians, so the speed limit is lowered as a safety precaution to pedestrians. An example of this in the metro would be Harvard Avenue. West of Northfield, its speed limit is 25 or 35 mph. That side of the street is lined with shops, houses and sidewalks.  East of Northfield there is nothing but shrubs, trees and golfcourses lining the street with no sidewalks, and the speed limit is 50 mph.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on January 28, 2008, 05:42:52 PM
I think the speed limit has to do with streets that have sidewalks. Streets with sidewalks have more pedestrians, so the speed limit is lowered as a safety precaution to pedestrians. An example of this in the metro would be Harvard Avenue. West of Northfield, its speed limit is 25 or 35 mph. That side of the street is lined with shops, houses and sidewalks.  East of Northfield there is nothing but shrubs, trees and golfcourses lining the street with no sidewalks, and the speed limit is 50 mph.

I have never paid attention.  Damn, first my memory, now my eyes.  I reduce my caffeine intake and now I'm falling apart.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 28, 2008, 08:34:31 PM
I think 35 is a little slow. Maybe 45 and it appears there will only be four light installed, correct?

I think LSB in Chicago works fine.  It should work fine for folks in metro Cleveland.  I don't believe that those living in the 'burbs should have a say in a development in Cleveland proper.

I don't think the suburbs should have the last word, but a little collaboration never hurt anyone. With that said, this hold up seems to have less to do with Lakewood/Rocky River than it does some highway-obsessed bureaucrat.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on January 28, 2008, 08:47:31 PM
The question gets anwered to me; we miss out on federal monies because our govt peeps don't do the papework; we don't have enough of a connection between our local reps, including the Mayor, and the State. I always get the impression, and maybe it's just me, that fiefdoms here in Cleveland are more important to our local people than developing a long term network of brainstorming and negotiations with state and county officials.  Is it me or is this true? It's like the Bush Admn just calling Iraq evil etc and diplomacy going by the wayside.

If you can shed some light that proves me wrong I will be glad! 
  I agree with Carole.  We need someone connected to the State. 

We just bought in Battery Park -- if this doesn't happen we'll be piZZed!  We took a chance on helping to build the city -- why can't the State.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on January 28, 2008, 08:49:44 PM
As Jane Campbell once said, one of the best things that could happen for Cleveland is for our region to secede from the state of Ohio.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 28, 2008, 09:38:53 PM
By all means, let Councilman Matt Zone and, especially, Jay Westbrook know your feelings on ODOT's stance about the Shoreway rebuild.

And, by the way, expect to see Lee Fisher put some heat on ODOT very soon.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: cle2032 on January 29, 2008, 06:50:14 AM
Quebec and Cleveland!  Quebland!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on January 29, 2008, 10:26:11 AM
I'm not going to say I really care one way or the other, but I think if they put traffic lights on the Shoreway and reduce the speed limit to 35 mph, it's going to be a major, major change for rush hour commuters, which I guess is their primary concern. I've timed this before - I can get from Cove and Edgewater in Lakewood to Huron and E. 9th downtown in 15 minutes during rush hour. This is what people are going to bitch like all hell about because I'm assuming by adding lights and slowing down the speed limit, it'll be like going from downtown to University Circle on Chester during rush hour, which is a pain in the ass.

Perhaps there is a way to compromise? For example, from 7 to 9 a.m. and 4 to 6 p.m. perhaps all the light blink yellow or something like that? I'm just trying to imagine how you'd handle that traffic volume because unless gas goes up to $10 a gallon, people are going to still drive downtown and there's no way you're going to take Detroit. That'd be infuriating.

I agree that people are going to bitch and moan about the longer commute time on the Shoreway, because that's just what people do.  But even a downgraded Shoreway will be able to move a lot of cars relatively quickly- it's not like they're narrowing it to one lane each way.

As for Chester: calling that route a pain in the ass is just a testament to how spoiled Clevelanders are in their commutes.  The idea of being able to drive 5 miles through the heart of the city at rush hour in only 15 mins is unthinkable to people in many urban areas.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on January 29, 2008, 12:35:42 PM
Amen and well said!  :clap: Chester might be a PITA compared to some rinkydink backwater but it's NOTHING compared to most comparable cities. Anytime someone complains that "waaaah, my commute's going to be 5 minutes longer" - I want to dropkick them to somewhere like Chicago (or even smaller cities which have much worse commute times than Cleveland) and let them stew in their juices and grow some ulcers. Then they can come back and realize just how easy they have it. Suck it up, nancies!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on January 29, 2008, 09:52:56 PM
Amen and well said!  :clap: Chester might be a PITA compared to some rinkydink backwater but it's NOTHING compared to most comparable cities. Anytime someone complains that "waaaah, my commute's going to be 5 minutes longer" - I want to dropkick them to somewhere like Chicago (or even smaller cities which have much worse commute times than Cleveland) and let them stew in their juices and grow some ulcers. Then they can come back and realize just how easy they have it. Suck it up, nancies!
Amen to that.  A similar sized city close by is Pittsburgh.    I lived and worked there for many years.  The city is surrounded by hills and rivers -- that's the obvious part.  The not so obvious part is that there are only so many ways to work around the hills and rivers and build roadways to get to the city.  The traffice is phenomonal as anyone who has ever waited and participated in the event that IS 4 lanes of traffic collapsing into 2 in order to go through one of the many tunnels through the hills only to find one of 2 lanes closed due to an accident can attest to --- the traffic in Cleveland is a RELIEF compared to Pittsburgh!  At least that is what I felt when I moved to Cleveland.  So, if it takes 5 minutes longer on a commute because the speed limit is reduced and a few lights are added -- get up earlier, fill up a second mug of good coffee, and find some creative way to spend all that energy on instead of anger.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: cle2032 on January 30, 2008, 11:32:09 AM
It took at least 1.5 hours to get from the Loop to Ohare on Dec. 17th when I went to India.  Now this is quite the daily norm especially around that part of the city but boy, what I wouldn't give to be stuck in that traffic compared to Bombay!   

More NEO-ians need to leave for a bit!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on January 30, 2008, 11:42:48 AM
^just so long as they come back to set their roots. :wink:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jamiec on January 30, 2008, 12:09:02 PM
I agree with you, but in a way I don't think it matters what it's like in Chicago or NYC. This is Cleveland and Ohio. Cleveland is being compared with driving elsewhere in the region. It's not like people here can choose to drive here or one of those other places with horrible traffic. So, I'm saying that relatively speaking in regard to the region, driving down Chester during rush our is a pain in the butt. How do you make people accept that beyond saying "it's way worse elsewhere?"

Honestly in those other cities, I wouldn't even consider a car. Around here, that's not as convenient.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on January 30, 2008, 12:32:59 PM
^ I know people on here cringe at the sight of the names Paul Volpe and City Architecture... However I recall him saying something in regards to the E.12th streetscape project (when people were talking about how the project was going to make it more difficult for traffic) that yes, it might make things a little more of a PITA. But that sometimes that has to happen to create a good urban environment... This is the perfect example.  If the shoreway has to slow down and delay people's commute 5-10 minutes... SO? I mean seriously there is so much to gain from this that it's worth a little extra commute. People will have to deal with it.  I have had it with ODOT's sole objective in this city being getting people around, through, past, and out of our city at the speed of light. At some point it is not just about convenience... but about development and inspiring and enabling growth.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 30, 2008, 12:43:32 PM
^ I know people on here cringe at the sight of the names Paul Volpe and City Architecture...

I don't think that all of us feel that way. I'd take Paul Volpe's designs for Cleveland over Bob Corna's. City Architecture does a decent job. We just need more firms in on the action. City Arch can do a decent job.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on January 30, 2008, 01:00:25 PM
I agree with you, but in a way I don't think it matters what it's like in Chicago or NYC. This is Cleveland and Ohio. Cleveland is being compared with driving elsewhere in the region. It's not like people here can choose to drive here or one of those other places with horrible traffic. So, I'm saying that relatively speaking in regard to the region, driving down Chester during rush our is a pain in the butt. How do you make people accept that beyond saying "it's way worse elsewhere?"

Honestly in those other cities, I wouldn't even consider a car. Around here, that's not as convenient.

I hear ya, the comparisons don't make for satisfying answers.  But I think they do help contextualize the trade-off that McCleveland describes.  No-one is saying we should just tear out every highway and replace them with biking paths, but we have so little congestion in our town that we could probably afford to slow things down a little bit if the benefits are going to be real.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on January 30, 2008, 01:20:55 PM
^ I know people on here cringe at the sight of the names Paul Volpe and City Architecture...

I don't think that all of us feel that way. I'd take Paul Volpe's designs for Cleveland over Bob Corna's. City Architecture does a decent job. We just need more firms in on the action. City Arch can do a decent job.

I don't really have any problems with them either... I just know often when they are brought up, snide remarks follow.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on January 30, 2008, 01:31:33 PM
It's analogous to gas prices.  People complain about gas prices here and then sputter when I point out that gas is cheaper here than almost any place I know.  Unless I botched a conversion somewhere, gas is $7.76/gallon in the UK.  But people don't want to hear that because they're insulated from truly high fuel prices or truly bad traffic. 

I don't know the west side much.  Aren't the same people who use the shoreway to get into work the same that could take advantage of the West Shore commuter rail being proposed?  I've only been in that area a handful of times but even in those few visits it's boggled my mind how difficult it is to get down there to the park.   This Hebebrand seems like...a massive tool.  Is it okay to say that?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: FrqntFlyr on January 30, 2008, 01:58:25 PM
^Good point re: the comparison with gas prices.

Yes, a good chunk of these commuters could take advantage of the West Shore commuter proposal.

Well, he definitely sounds like he's reneged on his earlier comments about the Shoreway.  What that makes him, I don't know.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: conovercourt on January 30, 2008, 02:16:42 PM
I 90 tore the heart out of my family's neighborhood near West Tech. (Never heard Cudell much back when I was growing up.) Isn't that enough freeway between Lakewood and Downtown?

Hooray for West Shoreway Blvd.!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: theguv on January 30, 2008, 02:39:51 PM
Great Lakes Guy: 3 Great Lakes Cities Travel the Same Road

http://greatlakesguy.blogspot.com/2008/01/3-great-lakes-cities-travel-same-road.html

Across the region, urban residents faced with major highway reconstruction projects are calling for engineering designs that embrace access for pedestrians and bikers, pay more attention to mass transit, and strive to enhance urban character.

And, across the region, transportation officials show signs of resisting ideas that work toward improving access for pedestrians and bikers, integrating mass transit options, and enhancing urban character.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on January 30, 2008, 03:07:47 PM
I get negative vibe from Hebebrand.  Balking at this project, pooh-poohing any creative visions for the Innerbelt and cramming a monstrous bridge north of the existing one.  Never met him, only know what I read in the papers and in the internets.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 30, 2008, 08:08:15 PM
Thanks for the article, Guv. Someone needs to send that to Matt Zone to reinforce the good fight he is fighting, and to ODOT to show them that it's not 1950 anymore.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: willyboy on January 31, 2008, 09:11:22 AM
I get negative vibe from Hebebrand.  Balking at this project, pooh-poohing any creative visions for the Innerbelt and cramming a monstrous bridge north of the existing one.  Never met him, only know what I read in the papers and in the internets.

I don't really have my people and ODOT stuff straight, but isn't Hebebrand appointed under Strickland, wasn't it Proctor before, responsible for the majority of the inner belt bridge fiasco.  Is it just crappy ODOT policies (obviously developed in a different age), or is it these people are total, clueless idiots, or both.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on January 31, 2008, 09:21:28 AM
^Hebebrand is just the local project manager (District Manager even?) and predates Strickland.  Policy-schmolicy, I think it's a case where the politicians need to put the lost-the-forest-for-the-trees engineer in his place.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on January 31, 2008, 09:30:11 AM
most of the ODOT staffers/managers are not political appointees. 

even though strickland can change the overall direction and priorities by appointing a new director who controls the $$, many of the day-to-day actors are the same, and i think this is part of the problem - they haven't changed their focus on what ODOT should be doing.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: willyboy on January 31, 2008, 09:40:32 AM
I see, but there is a new head of ODOT that people were somewhat happy about (replacing Proctor)?  But its more about the same old mindset all the way down the line...  Not easy to change the direction of something that has such a miopic view of what they do.   

By the way, some news about Proctor for everyone that wasnt wishing him so well when he departed........

An investigation in allegations of favoritism and misconduct by the former director
http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2008/01/28/daily23.html
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Map Boy on February 13, 2008, 06:44:13 AM
Editorial from the PD:

Editorial: Gov. Strickland and ODOT must quit stalling on West Shoreway

The West Shoreway project is something Cleveland needs; Strickland and ODOT have long-standing promises to keep

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

There is no possible excuse Strickland, Fisher and ODOT can concoct for not proceeding.

Quit stalling

The West Shoreway project is something Cleveland needs;

Strickland and ODOT have long-standing promises to keep

The decision by Gov. Ted Strickland's ad ministration to delay - or scuttle alto gether - an important Cleveland highway project shows a stunning insensitivity to this community's needs.

If Strickland and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher - who at last check still lived around here - care even a little bit about the people of Cleveland's neighborhoods, they'll see to it that the Ohio Department of Transportation stops trying to kill vital highway projects here that have been planned for nearly a decade.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on February 13, 2008, 08:14:31 AM
Good for the PD to call out the governor, especially if he is trying to make himself available to be VP
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on February 13, 2008, 08:30:30 AM
^Definitely.  This is very, very frustrating.  I'm not a big fan of the stupid innerbelt excuse either.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on February 13, 2008, 08:38:39 AM
Actually, I get the Innerbelt excuse. I think this city is going to have a true appreciation of traffic congestion when the half of the Innerbelt's lanes, in both directions, are closed during the bridge reconstruction. I regularly get to see what the Innerbelt is like when one lane on the bridge is closed -- traffic backs up at least a couple of miles. To lose two lanes in each direction is unfathomable.

And no RTA bus/park-n-ride expansion plus keeping West Shoreway open is enough to soften the pain. ODOT should be jumping all over the West Shore Corridor, now! There's still time to develop this option.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on February 13, 2008, 08:55:52 AM
Well I certainly agree with the West Shore Corridor part!  I hear you, I certainly understand the innerbelt excuse, I just think it's lame to let ODOT hold the Shoreway project hostage to the interminable innerbelt project.  I don't doubt traffic will increase on the alternative routes, but people will get used to it and life will go on.  A four mile backup at rushhour would still give Cleveland a comparative advantage traffic wise over most big cities- business will not come a grinding halt.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on February 13, 2008, 09:39:14 AM
^But remember, the innerbelt was not the excuse, it was "refined numbers"

bunch of jerks, I tell ya
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 26, 2008, 08:22:30 AM
http://www.cleveland.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1206520208126350.xml&coll=2 (http://www.cleveland.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1206520208126350.xml&coll=2)

West Shoreway boulevard project won't begin until at least 2013
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Sarah Hollander
Plain Dealer Reporter
The West Shoreway's conversion into a boulevard is now scheduled to begin no sooner than 2013.

The Ohio Department of Transportation will wait until it finishes repairs to the Inner Belt Bridge through downtown to avoid compounding traffic problems.

In the meantime, ODOT plans to improve neighborhood connections to the Shoreway and Lake Erie. Construction on this part of the job could begin as early as 2011.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 26, 2008, 08:23:51 AM
Is this the only topic for the shoreway? If so, I think that the title is a bit odd. Could we change the name to something like "Cleveland: Converting the Shoreway into a boulevard"
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on March 26, 2008, 11:40:33 AM
*Sigh*  Not a fan of this delay.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 26, 2008, 11:53:44 AM
^well, it is actually better news than what we've been hearing over the past six months.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Ctownrocks1 on December 05, 2008, 07:01:03 PM
Plan to turn Cleveland's West Shoreway into a boulevard gains momentum
Posted by Karen Farkas/Plain Dealer Reporter December 05, 2008 20:11PM
Categories: Real Time News, Traffic

CLEVELAND - The dream to turn the West Shoreway into a slow-speed boulevard and gateway to Cleveland's West Side neighborhoods is about to become reality after years of disagreement between residents, city officials and highway planners...


http://www.wkyc.com/news/politics_govt/politics_article.aspx?storyid=102229&catid=130 (http://www.wkyc.com/news/politics_govt/politics_article.aspx?storyid=102229&catid=130)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on December 05, 2008, 09:04:08 PM
Quote
Proposed intersections have ramps that allow traffic to move without lights and at West 73rd Street, traffic and a multi-use path will go north under railroad tracks then east to an exiting bridge over the Shoreway, he said.

I don't understand this sentence. If someone else understands it, please explain it to me.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on December 05, 2008, 09:31:58 PM
Quote
Proposed intersections have ramps that allow traffic to move without lights and at West 73rd Street, traffic and a multi-use path will go north under railroad tracks then east to an exiting bridge over the Shoreway, he said.

I don't understand this sentence. If someone else understands it, please explain it to me.



enter MayDay with a map!  lol
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: buckeye1 on December 05, 2008, 09:54:58 PM
Looking at the intersection of W 73rd and Father Caruso, the tracks are just to the north and anything but an at-grade crossing would be challenging without disrupting the Battery Park neighborhood.  There is no bridge over the Shoreway to the east, but there is the underpass that serves Edgewater Park - I suppose that could be part of this W. 73rd extension although it's more in line with W. 69th...

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=41.487965,-81.734667&panoid=MMgRGwdJ4i-Qr0US_Jcwuw&cbp=12,4.0793238144826205,,0,10.737178549689765&ll=41.488022,-81.728153&spn=0,359.973907&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=41.487965,-81.734667&panoid=MMgRGwdJ4i-Qr0US_Jcwuw&cbp=12,4.0793238144826205,,0,10.737178549689765&ll=41.488022,-81.728153&spn=0,359.973907&z=16)

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.488022,-81.728153&spn=0,359.973907&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.489842,-81.732616&panoid=FEQpkAErKEuXls1pxSRdFQ&cbp=12,333.49092136556856,,0,1.2621412479293963 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.488022,-81.728153&spn=0,359.973907&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.489842,-81.732616&panoid=FEQpkAErKEuXls1pxSRdFQ&cbp=12,333.49092136556856,,0,1.2621412479293963)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on December 06, 2008, 07:30:15 AM
Plan to turn Cleveland's West Shoreway into a boulevard gains momentum
Posted by Karen Farkas/Plain Dealer Reporter December 05, 2008 20:11PM

CLEVELAND - The dream of turning the West Shoreway into a slow-speed boulevard and gateway to Cleveland's West Side neighborhoods is about to become reality after years of disagreement between residents, city officials and highway planners.

More at Cleveland.com

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/plan_to_turn_clevelands_west_s.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/plan_to_turn_clevelands_west_s.html)

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gildone on December 06, 2008, 08:06:23 AM
^I'm not that familiar with this project.  What will be done with the bridge over the flats. Will it remain as-is?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on December 06, 2008, 08:45:23 AM
I was wondering about that, too ..
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on December 06, 2008, 09:48:35 AM
One of my neighbors had said he had seen a set of plans (yeah, I know ---3rd hand info, but it's all I gots ;) ) that showed a slightly easterly rerouted W. 73rd that used a portion of the land currently held as a parking lot by the factory that sits between 70th and 73rd South of Father Caruso.

The grading would begin a few hundred feet South of the railroad tracks on this new 73rd and cut down to the Shoreway.

Supposedly Father Caruso would then be bisected, being a dead end at 70th and at 73rd (where the current Norht entrance into Battery Park lies).  This seems odd though, since a lot of construction effort has already gone into beautifying the North entrance at 73rd and Fr. Caruso.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on December 06, 2008, 10:08:53 AM
Yes, it will.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: buckeye1 on December 06, 2008, 05:33:00 PM
Lakefront West Proposed Project Summary
The purpose of the Lakefront West Project is to convert US-6 from a high speed limited access freeway to a boulevard in accordance with “Connecting Cleveland: The Waterfront District Plan”.
The next element of the Lakefront West Project (PID 77330) will complete the environmental document for the entire project and evaluate buildings within the full-build footprint for eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. The full project has been divided into two phases in response to fiscal constraints.
Phase I
Funded and implemented through ODOT original TRAC commitment of $49.8M.
• Make Safety and Operational Improvements to the West Blvd. and Lake Ave. Intersections. This includes merging the ramps south (toward the eastbound ramp) to create one road farther east than the current layout. The merging of the ramps is to make the roadway feel more like a scenic park road, rather than a high-speed ramp. This will also close the short WB Edgewater Drive exit, creating a single exit from the shoreway and adding parkland.
• Rehabilitate the West 76th St. pedestrian tunnel under the Shoreway with ADA compliance between the existing underpasses and connect to the existing Edgewater Park multi-purpose paths.
• Construct a new bridge with NS railroad tracks (West 73rd traffic will go below NS) and create a two-way road to connect relocated West 73rd St. to the West Shoreway and Edgewater Park through the existing Shoreway bridge. This will be a ramp-style configuration (no signal) that connect the neighborhoods from the south to the Shoreway and Edgewater Park.
• There will be no major modification within Edgewater Park until after a “Park Master Plan” is created.
• Construct a new at-grade intersection (right-in/right-out) at Division Ave. This intersection will be unsignalized. Note: this work will be included with Phase I based on the availability of funds.
• Construct a new at-grade intersection (right-in/right-out) at West 54th St. This intersection will be unsignalized. Note: this work will be included with Phase I based on the availability of funds.
• Make Safety and Operational Improvements to West 45th St. and West 49th St. (right in/right out access). It will close the gate/driveway at the Cleveland Water Division plant that is no longer necessary. It will also create a cul-de-sac at Tillman Ave. with at two-way operation east of West 49th St.
• Reconfigure West 49th St./Herman Ave. over the West Shoreway to accommodate the multi-purpose trail. The bridge section of two traffic lanes in each direction will now be one traffic lane in each direction.
• Construct a multi-purpose trail expanding the Cleveland Lakefront Bikeway from West 25th St. to West 65th St.
• Consider interim improvements at West 28th St. to increase pedestrian and vehicular safety.
• Maintain the existing six-lane configuration with concrete median. Set the speed at 35 mph as a park road.
PID 77330, Cuy-6-12.20, Lakefront West
December 2, 2008 – Stakeholder Meeting
Phase II
Funded and implemented through the City of Cleveland using any remaining money from the Phase 1 TRAC commitment ($49.8M – Phase 1 actual costs) plus any additional funding from other sources (to be determined).
• Consider closing the Entrance Ramp from West 28th St. to SR-2 EB. West 45th St. would be the new EB access to SR-2 EB.
• Relocate the US-6 Exit/Entrance Ramps from West 25th St. to West 28th St., including widening West 28th St. and Detroit Ave. This fills in the abandoned ramps and makes land available for neighborhood development.
• Reconfigure the Intersection of West 25th St./Main Ave./Washington Ave. to create a through-movement for Main –West 25th St. traffic, including truck traffic.
• Improve Edgewater Park Entrance with a reconfigured north half of the interchange (after preparation of an updated Park Master Plan). Note: the environmental document for the Park Master Plan will be separate from this Lakefront project.
• Add a supplemental multi-purpose trail adjacent to the Shoreway from Edgewater Park to West Blvd. This multi-purpose trail is located along the Shoreway (in lieu of a sidewalk).
• Reconstruct US-6 pavement, including reconfiguring the typical section to reflect a lower 35 mph speed and adding a landscaped median. US-6 will remain a six-lane roadway between Lake Ave. and the Main Avenue Bridge approach.
The use of the SAFETEA-LU Earmarked money ($728K = 91% of $800K) is to be determined. Possible use is West 28th St. safety improvements or other improvements in either Phase I or Phase II.
The Detail Design contract will concentrate on Phase 1 only.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/PublicMeetings/Documents/pid77330_2008-12-02%20proposed%20project-final.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/PublicMeetings/Documents/pid77330_2008-12-02%20proposed%20project-final.pdf)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BK on December 09, 2008, 01:08:55 PM
Myself and a number of the folks from Battery Park will be at the meeting Thursday.  Hopefully there will be good news to report.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on December 09, 2008, 02:47:13 PM
^I'm not that familiar with this project.  What will be done with the bridge over the flats. Will it remain as-is?
I was wondering about that, too ..

Yes, it will.

To expand on this: the West Shoreway from the Clifton/Lake to the main avenue Bridge will be downgraded to a boulevard. The bridge would remain; however there has been talk about reconfiguring both ends of the bridge (West 25th and East 6th areas). In the long term, planners have proposed extending the boulevard from the Main Avenue Bridge to the current Dead Man's Curve area.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on December 09, 2008, 09:10:25 PM
^I'm not that familiar with this project.  What will be done with the bridge over the flats. Will it remain as-is?
I was wondering about that, too ..

Yes, it will.

To expand on this: the West Shoreway from the Clifton/Lake to the main avenue Bridge will be downgraded to a boulevard. The bridge would remain; however there has been talk about reconfiguring both ends of the bridge (West 25th and East 6th areas). In the long term, planners have proposed extending the boulevard from the Main Avenue Bridge to the current Dead Man's Curve area.

Which would be AMAZING. But that's gotta be years away.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Grumpy on December 10, 2008, 03:02:25 AM
^Well technically the whole project is probably years away, but that portion is probably so low on ODOT's priority list that unless Obama can get a whole lot more infrastructure money than anyone is expecting we're not going to see it for decades.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BK on December 16, 2008, 04:22:46 PM
I went to the meeting last Thursday and came away rather impressed with the plans.  The engineering/design/environmental work is to start this upcoming year with work starting in mid-2010. 

The first area to receive attention is the pedestrian tunnel at the end of W76 to the beach.  This work will include making it ADA complaint by replacing the steps between the railroad tracks and the Shoreway with a graded ramp.  They are also going to tie in the entrance on the park side to the existing multi-use trails.  Later phases of the project include extending multi-use trails to the Detroit-Superior Bridge. 

Later in 2010 or 1st half of 2011, they will start work on the W73 underpass.  Before this can occur, they have to re-align a sewer interceptor that currently runs along the tracks.  The other new intersections at W54 and W45 will probably not start until something is done about the Inner Belt, as the Shoreway will be a major detour route.  The work on W73rd can occur because it does not affect the Shoreway traffic flow.

Overall I was quite impressed with the plan and it looks like this is finally going to become reality after years of discussion.  Very detailed information and charts are available at this site:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on December 16, 2008, 09:31:51 PM
Looks like a highway to me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: FrqntFlyr on December 16, 2008, 09:57:13 PM
Yeah, and apparently the fight to get rid of the Lake Avenue exit/entrance ramps was lost.  ODOT won, which is what seems to always happen.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on December 16, 2008, 10:57:02 PM
Looks like a highway to me.

That's exactly what I thought.  I was under the impression that they were going to get rid of the on/off ramps and install lights.  Guess I misunderstood that.  This just looks like a bunch of landscaping work to me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on December 16, 2008, 11:20:35 PM
I've never quite understood the allure of this project.  There are obvious benefits, like being able to drive down 73rd to Edgewater.  And there will be more crosswalks to Edgewater, which is generally hard to get to.  Other than that, I don't see how this conversion does anything to connect neighborhoods to the lake itself.  It connects neighborhoods to another slow E-W road, but we have plenty of those already. 

Much of this shoreline will remain industrial into the forseeable future.  That's what cuts neighborhoods off from the lake.  This highway is less intrusive than many others I can think of.  I would much rather see a better innerbelt arrangement with a better bridge, or perhaps a rail expansion.  While many people support the shoreway project and are anxious to get it underway, I know quite a few living along this stretch who don't want it at all.  I'm not sure that another program to slow down traffic is the most user-friendly thing Cleveland could do. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on December 17, 2008, 05:47:50 AM
The desire was to create a boulevard, ala Lakeshore Boulevard in Chicago, along which housing and other uses could be developed to promote pedestrian activities. I don't see how that is possible with this proposal to preserve a highway whose design has more in common with an interstate. Sometimes I don't think ODOT knows how to do anything else except try to move as many as cars as possible as fast as possible. As if that was always desireable......
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: buckeye1 on December 17, 2008, 06:06:48 AM
Unimpressed.  The only worthwhile aspect is connecting Battery Park to Edgewater via 73rd.  Otherwise it's still a bunch of onramps and offramps, which is difficult to get excited about.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: w28th on December 17, 2008, 07:05:13 AM
Lakeshore Drive is hardly pedestrain friendly from what I remember.  It's basically a highway just like the current Shoreway.  If development could be encouraged at these new intersections north of the railroad tracks, I think this project could be a success.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CBC on December 17, 2008, 07:24:50 AM
I take it the 35 mph speed limit isn't happening? 

EDIT: I found that they still referenced the 35 MPH in the Dec 2008 update for phase 2 by reconfiguring the lanes, eliminating shoulders and adding median for 35 mph traffic standards.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jpop on December 17, 2008, 07:43:33 AM
I thought the whole point of this was to down-grade it to a boulevard. As in, flatten it to a regular street, not the freeway it basically is now. Is that not happening? If not, then what's the point of this??
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CBC on December 17, 2008, 08:03:07 AM
Jpop,
I see how this plan is an improvement by the access up by Battery Park but I was under the impression that this was going to be a flat boulevard, too. From the earlier renderings and description of the plans I was envisioning basically an extension of Clifton Blvd from Edgewater to W.25/W.28 with 3 or 4 Traffic light intersections and maybe a couple of underpasses. I thought there was a push to develop the land actually on the shoreway too?

Do these off and on ramps accomplish anything that smart traffic lights and right hand turns only during rush hour couldn't accomplish? I mean the shoreway basically funnels 70-80%% of its traffic down Clifton and Iimagine that if the speed limit is the same you wouldn't get the back ups from cars slowing down.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CBC on December 17, 2008, 08:26:12 AM
Don't forget to fill out the comment form. It is due by tomorrow.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/PublicMeetings/Pages/CommentForm.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/PublicMeetings/Pages/CommentForm.aspx)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on December 17, 2008, 08:32:30 AM
I just looked at the lakefront plan drawing and they do envision a lot of new development along the converted road.  They also disagree with ODOT about how bad the traffic on it would get.  I've never seen traffic there get backed up westbound.  Eastbound can get bad in the morning, with Lake, Clifton, and West Blvd from the south all bottlenecking into the shoreway.  Westbound it's the opposite effect, one road becomes three and everyone's happy. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BK on December 18, 2008, 01:01:54 PM
I think the biggest reason for the traffic lights going away were complaints from Edgewater and Lakewood residents.  There were some folks at the meeting who still expressed their concern with speed being reduced to 35MPH.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on December 18, 2008, 01:37:16 PM
Chester and the west shoreway should both be 50 MPH.  We absolutely positively should not make it difficult to get into Cleveland, or to get around within it.  The number of no-turn-on-reds should be reduced as well.  There should be none of them on the new shoreway.  Wholly independent of transit vs. cars, policies that restrict traffic flow beyond expected norms are drags on residential growth and tourism.  They create a sense of entrapment.  Just let people go.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on December 18, 2008, 01:55:51 PM
Chester and the west shoreway should both be 50 MPH.  We absolutely positively should not make it difficult to get into Cleveland, or to get around within it.  The number of no-turn-on-reds should be reduced as well.  There should be none of them on the new shoreway.  Wholly independent of transit vs. cars, policies that restrict traffic flow beyond expected norms are drags on residential growth and tourism.  They create a sense of entrapment.  Just let people go.

I completely disagree.  Turning Chester into a "free way" will discourage any pedestrian activity we want to see in the area.
 
Who will want to walk on a street where cars are doing 50? We want to attract people to neighborhoods, but what parent wants to send their kid to the corner store, knowing their child will have to cross a danger speedway?
 
Raising the speed limit on Chester, Euclid, Carnegie or any other avenue will only hamper the cities current plan to repopulate its neighborhoods.
 
Who is raising the speed limit "making it difficult to get into (or get around) Cleveland"???
 
Street should be for people, not cars.  I would much rather see chester lose one lane and the median and widen the sidewalks.  This way we can encourage developers to build some 10-15 story buildings right up to the sidewalk on this street to support the growing number of jobs in the immediate area.
 
The shoreway should also be reduced and the wishes of those living in its proximity should have majority concern.  Those commuting need to realize that if they have issues getting into downtown then rethink where they chose to live.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CBC on December 18, 2008, 01:59:46 PM
Here are my comments to ODOT..

"To Whom It May Concern:

First,I applaud the effort to open up access to the lakefront by modifying the current layout of the West Shoreway. In particular I support the changes made at W. 73th to give access to Battery Park and the surrounding areas. This is am emerging neighborhood and increased access to the lakefront will only add to the list of positive attributes. I also applaud the effort to improve and connect the multi-use trails tying the Gold Coast and Gordon Square with access to downtown.

However, my biggest disappointment with the current design is the retention of on-ramps and off-ramps, which does limit access and limits future development along the West Shoreway. From earlier press releases and renderings, it appeared that redesign of the West Shoreway would result in a 35 mph landscaped boulevard that would have 3 or 4 intersections with traffic lights and the potential for land along the Boulevard to be open to development, creating the potential for a new lakefront neighborhood. The current plan appears to result in some sort of hybrid resulting in a limited access 35 mph divided highway that still limits opening up developable land along the West Shoreway.

As someone who commuted the West Shoreway to downtown for a number of years, I can understand the traffic concerns. However I think that the concerns about traffic that drove the retention of on and off ramps could be accommodated by intersections with traffic lights. Specifically, during rushhour the 3 or 4 new lights being flashing yellow in the East and West directions, flashing red in the North and South directions, and the whole span of the West Shoreway being right-turn only should be studied to see if it is a viable solution. Even if a scenario with intersections, like the one outlined above,  results in incrementally more congestion it would be outweighed by the potential created  for Cleveland to have real development along the lakefront.  By leaving the on-ramps and off-ramps I feel that current plan is planning for the 4 hours of rushhour a day and potentially forgetting the other 20 hours in a day robbing Clevelanders of one of their greatest assets  for years to come.

Thank you for allowing me to submit my comments and once again applaud the effort by ODOT to help facilitate the Lakefront Plan. If you have any questions for me please feel free to contact me by e-mail at *******.

Sincerely,

"CBC"
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on December 18, 2008, 02:20:37 PM
Many people choose to live near the shoreway because of the speedy trip to downtown.  That includes people in Cleveland proper and people who take the bus.  50 mph arterials work fine elsewhere.  Realistically, people walk on streets where cars are doing 50 all the time.  Big buildings happen on these streets too, although Chester seems to be zoned for McMansions.  Pedestrian bridges can solve crossing problems, but it's not like there aren't lights and crosswalks already. 

The shoreway fills a needed function as it is.  Chester fills a similar function on the east side, although not quite as effectively.  People new to it sometimes express surprise that its so aggressively 35, particularly when it's the only cut-through in its area.  A faster Chester would make it easier to get around the east side, which is a common complaint.  Slow on Euclid makes sense, partially because Chester exists.  Most of Chester would have to be completely repurposed before much pedestrian traffic develops there anyway. 

As much as I love transit, it isn't always practical.  Cleveland has a long way to go before much car-free living is truly plausible here.  A more welcoming car trip between downtown and UC (welcoming meaning fast and hassle-free) will help develop both, which in turn will help develop the corridor in between.  Making it more annoying to drive in a place doesn't necessarily encourage transit use or development there.         

Edit: about the ramps, I agree with CBC.  Ramps are too much, they foreclose any development wherever they sit.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on December 18, 2008, 03:54:22 PM
A more welcoming car trip between downtown and UC (welcoming meaning fast and hassle-free) will help develop both, which in turn will help develop the corridor in between.  Making it more annoying to drive in a place doesn't necessarily encourage transit use or development there. 

I'll never understand why people think the drive from U.C. to downtown is such a hassle....  5 miles through the heart of a city in only 15 minutes is pretty darn good...but that's another topic.

Anyway, I agree with everyone- this plan is kind of the worst of both worlds: what's the point of slowing traffic if there's no crosswalks or regular intersections?  Improved lakefront access through underpasses, etc. is fine and all, but it's not really a re-imagining of the Shoreway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Matches on December 19, 2008, 01:05:36 PM
Chester is almost perfectly fine as it is from a car-commuter's perspective.  I love it.  A gentle, hassle-free ride at 35 miles an hour gets you to the east-edge of downtown from UC before you know it.  The light timing is pretty much perfect except for a hiccup at E. 66th which is incredibly frustrating, given the smoothness of the rest of the trip.

As for pedestrian traffic, I consider it close to a lost cause.  It's a 6-lane corridor with a median even added in some places.  It will never be more pedestrian friendly than it is, unless lanes are reduced and sidewalks are widened, but I wouldn't worry about that for a while.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: theguv on December 19, 2008, 02:14:10 PM
http://www.clevelandcompetition.com/prizes.html (http://www.clevelandcompetition.com/prizes.html)  << winners were announced yesterday at a party at 1300 gallery (W. 78 studios) where all entries were displayed

the winners and several others will be posted online shortly.

great idea for a competition in that it addresses human scale/people centric design in an area bounded by rail & freeway
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 08, 2009, 08:03:19 PM
West Shoreway project highlighted in bold....

http://www.cleveland.com/westsidesun/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1231445328181590.xml&coll=4 (http://www.cleveland.com/westsidesun/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1231445328181590.xml&coll=4)

Cleveland submits wish list of projects for federal funds
Thursday, January 08, 2009
By Ken Prendergast
kprendergast@sunnews.com
West Side Sun News

Among $1.56 billion worth of infrastructure projects submitted by the city for federal economic stimulus funds, Mayor Frank Jackson singled out four projects as his highest priorities.
..........

Jackson submitted his 66-project list Dec. 22 to President-elect Barack Obama, Gov. Ted Strickland and Ohio's Congressional Delegation. In it, he highlighted these four projects:

+ $350 million for construction of a new westbound Innerbelt-Central Viaduct (Interstate 90) bridge over the Cuyahoga River valley.

+ $50 million for repair of the slumping Riverbed Road hillside in Ohio City which threatens to close the Cuyahoga River to shipping traffic.

+ $300 million for the Opportunity Corridor boulevard from Interstate 490 to University Circle.

+ $30 million for rebuilding the West Shoreway (state Route 2) between West 25th Street and Clifton Boulevard.

.......
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: freethink on January 14, 2009, 07:08:43 PM
West Shoreway lanes closed for long-term sewer projectPosted by Karen Farkas/Plain Dealer Reporter January 14, 2009 03:30AM
Categories: Real Time News, Traffic

Thomas Ondrey/The Plain Dealer
The West Shoreway will have lanes closed through mid-2010 as the Sewer District replaces a culvert. Traffic was backed up into Lakewood Tuesday. Cleveland's latest highway headache is the West Shoreway, where lanes will be closed through mid-2010 so the Sewer District can replace a 90-year-old concrete culvert.
 
Many morning commuters heading into Cleveland from the West Side Tuesday fumed because Shoreway traffic was backed up into Lakewood.


..........
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 14, 2009, 07:27:23 PM
The Westerly Sewer Interceptor is being rehabilitated because it is decaying. The project is unrelated to the West Shoreway rehabilitation which is not yet fully funded (hence the city requesting stimulus funds for it). So ODOT cannot go out for bid until there is funding.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 15, 2009, 10:52:18 AM
Recent simultaneous lane closures on the west shoreway, innerbelt bridge, and Detroit Ave have made Lakewood seem about 10 miles further from downtown than it actually is.  The weather doesn't seem to be a major factor in these traffic tie-ups, because traffic on any of these routes moves perfectly well once it gets past the eastbound bottleneck. 

I am increasingly skeptical of the west shoreway conversion plan, because it appears to serve a necessary purpose in its current configuration.   This doesn't just apply to car commuters, since buses in the area suffer identical delays and since Lakewood is (for the moment) very much underserved by rail.  Think about it-- unlike the east side, the west side's physical connections to downtown can be counted on one hand.  I'm beginning to think the free flow of those few connections is not to be messed with.           
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 15, 2009, 12:29:38 PM
Gotta get that West Shore Corridor commuter rail link established!!

http://www.allaboardohio.org/cms/index.php/content/current_campaigns_west_shore_corridor (http://www.allaboardohio.org/cms/index.php/content/current_campaigns_west_shore_corridor)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on January 15, 2009, 01:14:36 PM
Recent simultaneous lane closures on the west shoreway, innerbelt bridge, and Detroit Ave have made Lakewood seem about 10 miles further from downtown than it actually is.  The weather doesn't seem to be a major factor in these traffic tie-ups, because traffic on any of these routes moves perfectly well once it gets past the eastbound bottleneck. 

I am increasingly skeptical of the west shoreway conversion plan, because it appears to serve a necessary purpose in its current configuration.   This doesn't just apply to car commuters, since buses in the area suffer identical delays and since Lakewood is (for the moment) very much underserved by rail.  Think about it-- unlike the east side, the west side's physical connections to downtown can be counted on one hand.  I'm beginning to think the free flow of those few connections is not to be messed with.          

The increased traffic on the shoreway is due to the merging that occurs due to the lane closures. If you don't have merging, then flow should be fine. The plan maintains the same amount of lanes as currently exists. The reconfiguration will not produce traffic tie ups like you currently see.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on January 15, 2009, 01:45:19 PM
It's not like the reconfiguration is going to be anything other than a highway, anyway.  Oh wait, there'll be 35mph signs.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on January 15, 2009, 01:57:15 PM
It's not like the reconfiguration is going to be anything other than a highway, anyway.  Oh wait, there'll be 35mph signs.
lol   Why did I sense a little bit of "the pope" in that message.  lol
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 15, 2009, 03:14:27 PM
Recent simultaneous lane closures on the west shoreway, innerbelt bridge, and Detroit Ave have made Lakewood seem about 10 miles further from downtown than it actually is.  The weather doesn't seem to be a major factor in these traffic tie-ups, because traffic on any of these routes moves perfectly well once it gets past the eastbound bottleneck. 

I am increasingly skeptical of the west shoreway conversion plan, because it appears to serve a necessary purpose in its current configuration.   This doesn't just apply to car commuters, since buses in the area suffer identical delays and since Lakewood is (for the moment) very much underserved by rail.  Think about it-- unlike the east side, the west side's physical connections to downtown can be counted on one hand.  I'm beginning to think the free flow of those few connections is not to be messed with.          

The increased traffic on the shoreway is due to the merging that occurs due to the lane closures. If you don't have merging, then flow should be fine. The plan maintains the same amount of lanes as currently exists. The reconfiguration will not produce traffic tie ups like you currently see.

I haven't run a simulation of this, but it seems to me that the amount of stoppage per lane that occurs during merging would at least be similar to the amount that would result from traffic lights forcing the entire roadway to stop all at once.  Actually, I think even one single light would (by design) cause a lot more stoppage than one single 3-becomes-2 merge point.  They're talking about putting in 3 lights, which I believe would turn eastbound Clifton and Lake into parking lots for a solid two hours each morning.  It would also result in significantly more traffic on area sidestreets during that period, from people escaping to Detroit Ave.

Any property values gained in D-S will therefore be offset in Edgewater.  Appraisers take off a lot for traffic, especially can't-get-out-of-driveway traffic like we've seen this week.   

If we're going to switch from a car/highway transit model to one more balanced toward rail, which I'm all for, I'm afraid we might need to do it all at once.  Rush hours around here aren't bad at all when the existing set-up is fully functional, but constricting or retarding multiple routes along one corridor can change that in a hurry.  I would suggest that any west shoreway conversion 1) wait until the innerbelt is fixed, and 2) be done only in conjunction with a new rail line for the affected corridor.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on January 15, 2009, 03:19:24 PM
i take it you're a civil engineer and planner.  :roll:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 15, 2009, 03:32:45 PM
i take it you're a civil engineer and planner.  :roll:

Well... yes.  I was a professional logistical planner for about 5 years, trained in modeling traffic flows and analyzing bottlenecks.  I've passed APICS certification tests in production, capacity, and distribution control.  I also appraised houses for a short time.  My opinions on this are not entirely conjecture.  They're also similar to concerns raised by civil engineers at ODOT, for what that's worth.     
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on January 15, 2009, 03:43:40 PM
that's fine. you seem to think a lot like people from ODOT maybe you should work there.  be as concerned as possible about getting people through around and out of our city as quickly as humanly possible with your fantastic highways. 

If someone is really so terribly inconvenienced by having to wait an extra 5 minutes to get downtown in exchange for opening up the neighborhoods to the waterfront, that they just can't take it and want to move... by all means get as far away as humanly possible because I don't want people with that type of thinking around.

but don't worry. from everything presented you'll get to keep you're precious highway, albeit with a landscaped median.  The shoreway is the single greatest mistake ever created in cleveland city planning.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 15, 2009, 05:44:47 PM
RANT ON:  Keep in mind this is coming from a rail advocate's perspective, but most of this nation's transportation ills can be fixed by land use planning that requires less need for travel, especially vehicular travel. Yet many of us in the transportation planning field spend too much of our time trying to figure out how to design infrastructure to move more vehicles around, rather than trying to figure out land use design that requires less.

Where the rail advocate in me comes in:  Most of that land use that demands less of our transportation system is of a denser, mixed-use variety. And that land use tends to favor modes that thrive in walkable environments -- trains and transit.

RANT OFF
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 16, 2009, 08:40:34 AM
that's fine. you seem to think a lot like people from ODOT maybe you should work there.  be as concerned as possible about getting people through around and out of our city as quickly as humanly possible with your fantastic highways. 

If someone is really so terribly inconvenienced by having to wait an extra 5 minutes to get downtown in exchange for opening up the neighborhoods to the waterfront, that they just can't take it and want to move... by all means get as far away as humanly possible because I don't want people with that type of thinking around.

but don't worry. from everything presented you'll get to keep you're precious highway, albeit with a landscaped median.  The shoreway is the single greatest mistake ever created in cleveland city planning.

Now come on, you're drawing an evil moustache on me.  All my posts clearly indicate that I favor rail over highways, and dense urban development over any alternative.  The devil's in the details.  Maybe we disagree about them, and I understand your frustration, but please don't misrepresent where I'm coming from.  I want what's best for our core urban area.  Access among the various parts of it is something I consider critical.  Good traffic flow is not an anti-urban ideal.  I also condsider Lakewood to be part of Cleveland's core urban area.  It enhances and complements downtown.  Putting obstacles between the two is bad for both, in my opinion.

It also isn't clear to me how much the shoreway conversion will actually "open up neighborhoods to the lakefront."  These neighborhoods are still up on a plateau, are they not?  There's still a giant Edgewater parking lot and meadow that aren't going anywhere, are they?  None of the industry is moving either.  If you're worried about getting at the water, the shoreway is not the archnemesis you make it out to be.  Eliminate it entirely and the lake is no closer. 

In terms of getting people across, what could intersections accomplish that pedestrian bridges couldn't?  And even the most optimistic projections don't show that much new development along the converted boulevard, because the terrain and the existing development don't allow much room for it, regardless of how slow we force people to drive when they visit our fair city. 

And if you think the delays right now are five minutes, I'm glad you don't work at ODOT.  I trust you were kidding about that number.  These are change-your-entire-lifestyle delays, moving people multiple slots up the bus schedule all at once.  These are not Strongsville people, these are people who chose an urban lifestyle.  The desire for a short commute is not frivoulous.  It's a huge selling point in Edgewater and Lakewood, and if it comes off the table there will be widespread impact across a huge chunk of dense city that's currently very popular and functional.

To me, the cost-benefit equation does not work out in favor of changing the west shoreway at this point.  That doesn't mean I'm against the concept.  I only ask that it be accompanied by a rail expansion, and that it be well-coordinated with other road projects.  I don't think that means I should move to Hinckley.

 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on January 17, 2009, 11:29:36 AM
If Lakewood is part of the city core, does that make Mansfield a suburb?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 17, 2009, 01:02:51 PM
What does core really mean?  I would say most of the inner ring is core city.  It's what downtown is the downtown of.   The city ended at 55th for a long time.  Lakewood, and half of Parma really, are just extensions of Cleveland's main corridors.  The borders are arbitrary and they don't make much sense.  In a satellite view of the entire area, what I would consider core city jumps out at me.  It's the part that looks urban.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Boreal on January 17, 2009, 01:18:24 PM
...opening up the neighborhoods to the waterfront, ...

Can somebody explain to me how a West-Shoreway project could accomplish that?  I recall driving in the near west side neighborhood and trying to find a road to take me to Whiskey Island.  I remember thinking how nice it would be if the residents in that neighborhood could walk to Edgewater Park.  I went home, looked at some maps and noticed that the West Shoreway is an obvious impediment, but that the rail line through the neighborhood was an impediment too.

It has been a long while since I looked at the ODOT and/or Cleveland City plan to rehabilitate the West Shoreway into a "boulevard".  Can somebody describe for me what the (presumed) plan is to tie the neighborhood back to the shoreline/Edgewater?  What features would it have?  I cannot help but think that if the residents of those homes could walk to the beach and that the streets "backed up" to the shoreline that the property values would go up.  In my observation, those who have such an arrangement in Willoughby and Euclid "have it pretty good". Thanks
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on January 18, 2009, 01:30:52 PM
Take a look at the proposed project renderings at:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx)

The big changes are the access points at the West 73rd Street extension under the tracks and the rebuilt pedestrian tunnels at West 76th Street. Those would complement the already rebuilt tunnel at West 65th, which I think was nicely done.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Boreal on January 19, 2009, 12:41:25 PM
Tunnels...for the Morlocks.  With the road and the railroad, options are limited. 

Another nice thing about a coastal neighborhood is that the summer days are cooler within a few blocks of the lake.  It was always pleasant hanging out on my friend's porch on Neff Road.  Cool breeze and a tasty Bud--what else do you need?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jeremyck01 on January 19, 2009, 04:19:26 PM
Tasty Bud? An oxymoron indeed. Perhaps you meant Stella or a Great Lakes? :wink:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Boreal on January 20, 2009, 04:51:53 AM
Great Lakes wasn't invented yet when I was young.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 01, 2009, 08:42:51 PM
Anybody have anymore updates on this?  I have been trying to get news on the progress, but the last update I got was back in December at the public forum at Mt Carmel school.  I did notice that a portion of the northern slope of the tracks were cleared near W.73rd, perhaps for survey/layout of the new entrance?  I also heard that the W. 76th tunnel rehab might be experiencing delays?  I sure hope not, cleaning up this "scary tunnel" is an important part of making the area safe, appealing, and accessible to the lake.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Etheostoma Caeruleum on September 01, 2009, 09:37:28 PM
^ Totally agree... can a small group of people 'adopt-a-tunnel?'  At the least, keep it swept and litter free? Maybe Cleveland Public Art would be interested in painting a mural there....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 02, 2009, 06:12:59 AM
Actually the tunnel at 76th is relatively clean & graffiti free.  But the problem stems from the tunnel itself, so long, dark, water problems...   keeps most of the foot traffic out.  Once the (crumbling) steps are replaced with ramps for bikes, it'll get alot more traffic and help keep the bad elements out.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on September 02, 2009, 06:33:14 AM
Actually the tunnel at 76th is relatively clean & graffiti free.  But the problem stems from the tunnel itself, so long, dark, water problems...   keeps most of the foot traffic out.  Once the (crumbling) steps are replaced with ramps for bikes, it'll get alot more traffic and help keep the bad elements out.


"Sidewalk Superintendent extraordinaire"  LOL!   :clap:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 02, 2009, 07:54:38 AM
As a resident of this area, I was thrilled back in the spring when the "Battery Park" lettering was illuminated on the smokestack at the old powerhouse.  Unfortunately the lettering hasn't been lit up for a couple weeks now.  Probably switched off due to cost.  On a good note, there has been a bit of activity at the Powerhouse lately, meetings with the developer and others, presumably to take a look at leasing the space for office or storefront or restaurant. 

Anyone who's not familiar with this building should really swing by and check it out.  It's received a facelift to the tune of almost $1 million, in new roof, windows, floor and complete tuckpoint of all the masonry.  Just sitting empty now though, waiting for a lease, then they'll finish up the sitework and build out the interior.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on September 06, 2009, 08:48:37 PM
Anyone have an update to the project, particularly the West 76th Street tunnel renovation?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on September 06, 2009, 09:01:34 PM
Actually the tunnel at 76th is relatively clean & graffiti free.  But the problem stems from the tunnel itself, so long, dark, water problems...   keeps most of the foot traffic out.  Once the (crumbling) steps are replaced with ramps for bikes, it'll get alot more traffic and help keep the bad elements out.

Many times the tunnel does have graffiti on it.  After numerous calls made by some of the Battery Park residents to the City, council person Zone's office and the Safety Director for the Detroit Shoreway area the tunnel has been added to the "graffiti patrol" that is done periodically. 

As for the "adopt a tunnel" plan, well I think some of us have.  We personally have cleaned the tunnel twice along with a group of others.  When we walk we take trash bags with us and pick up.

The tunnel is dark -- more of us need to continue to call CPP and the City to get the lights repaired. 

Does anyone know of any updates to the schedule to renovate the tunnel?  I had heard that it was "unbundled" from the overall Shoreway project but I am not sure what that means.  Any information is much appreciated!


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on September 27, 2009, 03:52:13 PM
does anyone know when the west bound lane (northern most lane) will reopen from the sewer rebuild? 

i thought it was only a 12 week project or something throughout the summer, but it doesn't appear that much has been happening on this segment for the past few weeks.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on October 06, 2009, 06:07:58 AM
Still looking for any updates to the status of the tunnel at W 76.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on January 25, 2010, 07:40:32 AM
West Shoreway project gets a boost from Ohio lawmakers
By Aaron Marshall, The Plain Dealer
January 25, 2010, 6:00AM

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A long-awaited $60 million road project designed to transform the fast lanes of the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard got a key assist from state lawmakers last week.


Rep. Michael Skindell, a Lakewood Democrat, got language slipped into an unrelated bill that would drop the speed limit on a stretch of the West Shoreway, from 50 mph to 35. The bill passed the Ohio House Wednesday and now moves to the Senate.

However, drivers aren't likely to see the speed limit drop until about 2013, no matter when state lawmakers end up getting the provision enacted.


MORE AT http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/01/west_shoreway_project_gets_a_b.html
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: musky on January 25, 2010, 08:33:06 AM
From Friday's Planning Commission meeting via Cleveland  vs. the World (http://clevelandplanner.blogspot.com/2010/01/cleveland-planning-commission-report.html)
 
 "Developers are still working with ODOT to hammer out details of the  West 73rd curve leading to the West Shoreway. This will likely add more  usable space for the neighborhood. Work on the West 76 Street tunnel is set to start this spring. $1 million  has already been set aside for these improvements"
 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on January 26, 2010, 01:14:22 PM
 :clap:

Great news!  That combined with the restarted east bank of the Flats will create quite the stretch of activity in the west shoreway region!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on January 26, 2010, 08:04:40 PM
any update on when the westbound lane by w45 will re-open?  this has been closed for quite a while for what was supposed to be an 8 week project...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on January 26, 2010, 08:30:47 PM
I don't recall that ever being limited to 8 weeks:

"...lanes will be closed through mid-2010 so the Sewer District can replace a 90-year-old concrete culvert.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/01/west_shoreway_lanes_closed_for.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/01/west_shoreway_lanes_closed_for.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on January 26, 2010, 09:47:19 PM
I remember both figures, the 8 weeks and the mid-2010.  I think it was 2 separate projects and they did the 8 week one right before they started this one.  Could be wrong.  I just hope they have it done before they tear up the innerbelt. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: freethink on February 14, 2010, 02:05:14 PM
Nothing really new in this...


West 76th Street pedestrian tunnels to Edgewater Park to be renovated
By Karen Farkas, The Plain Dealer
February 14, 2010, 1:00AM

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Tom Beecher was walking to his West 80th Street home after his first day on a new job when he was struck by a westbound freight train while crossing the West 76th Street railroad tracks.

The 30-year-old man's skull was fractured and his right leg severed below the knee, according to a story in The Plain Dealer on March 10, 1909.

read on >>>
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/02/west_76th_street_pedestrian_tu.html





Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on February 21, 2010, 10:36:23 AM
Not sure if this was posted on any other forums (a quick search revealed no results).

Arrived home from a trip to find a postcard mailing from ODOT advertising a public open house on the Cleveland Lakefront West plan scheduled for February 23.

Here's the details from the card:

February 23, 2010  5:00 pm-8:00 pm
Exhibits Open 5:00 pm
Presentation:  6-7 pm
Q&A 7-8 pm

Pope John Hall Gymnasium
Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church West
6928 Detroit Ave
Cleveland OH

www.buckeyetraffic.org/lakefrontwest


I personally won't be able to attend due to another trip, but would love to hear from any UO members in attendance about updates to the Shoreway plan.



Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on February 24, 2010, 10:59:50 AM
Went to the meeting last night.   It was my first attendance at a public hearing on the matter.

Looks like ODOT is saying that the money is there for just about everythng *except* for the actual Shoreway transformation.  They gave a timetable for the tunnels and new connections.

I was a bit displeased that all of these new connections to the Shoreway Blvd are actually going to be ramps on and off. I was envisioning intersections.

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there.  (At least that was my take away)



The factory on Fr Caruso between 70th and 73rd wil be acquired to make the tunnel under the railway go through at (the equivalant of) about 71st in an S shape.


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tradition7 on February 24, 2010, 11:17:45 AM

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there.  (At least that was my take away)


If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work.  Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on February 24, 2010, 11:34:34 AM

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there.  (At least that was my take away)


If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work.  Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.

I backtrack much further than that now to go from Battery Park to Don's Lighthouse to get on the Shoreway there.  If you would sell your house over something so trivial, you must be pretty set on moving.  This late in the game, that is their plan, that is what is going to happen.

I attended the meeting too and was really impressed with the creativity and level of design that was being added.  I think the lookout "pause points" are a great feature that will add alot to the project.  It's not so much about the Shoreway even becoming a boulevard I think, as it is all the other connections and improvements.

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tradition7 on February 24, 2010, 12:18:02 PM

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there.  (At least that was my take away)


If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work.  Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.

I backtrack much further than that now to go from Battery Park to Don's Lighthouse to get on the Shoreway there.  If you would sell your house over something so trivial, you must be pretty set on moving.  This late in the game, that is their plan, that is what is going to happen.

I attended the meeting too and was really impressed with the creativity and level of design that was being added.  I think the lookout "pause points" are a great feature that will add alot to the project.  It's not so much about the Shoreway even becoming a boulevard I think, as it is all the other connections and improvements.

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...

I guess I should've mentioned that I rent and I was already considering a move to try out a new neighborhood.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on February 24, 2010, 01:57:23 PM

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...


What were some of their complaints?  Anything legit or was it all anti-government spending Tea Party antics?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on February 24, 2010, 03:46:22 PM

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...


What were some of their complaints?  Anything legit or was it all anti-government spending Tea Party antics?

I left after the first speaker. He (the same one who intermittantly booed during the ODOT presentation) pulled out a reem of loose leaf pater and started into a generalized anti-governemt rant, demanded that all of the land on which the water treamtent plant now stands be returned to the public, ranter a bit more, then demanded clousre of Burke.

I took off to go get drunk at the Parkview at that point ;)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on February 24, 2010, 07:48:21 PM
For the most part, the vocal complaints weren't valid.  The rambling loon at the beginning, a few people later some woman basically launched into a history lesson and how the whole project was a waste of money as long as the city was losing population...   some valid complaints about historic preservation...   some still feel the 35 mph speed is a bust, others feel the road should get at-grade crossings with stop lights, traffic bedamned...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on February 25, 2010, 09:25:50 AM
I love the argument of some folks that since the city is losing population nothing should be spent to make it better.   

Now in some cases I agree with them--spending money on tourist follies like aquariums and casinos are not what this city needs.

Attracting jobs and employers with large scale quality-of-life improvements for all residents (as I would consider this West Shoreway conversion) should be put at the forefront of our efforts.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BK on February 25, 2010, 11:16:48 AM
The factory on Fr Caruso between 70th and 73rd wil be acquired to make the tunnel under the railway go through at (the equivalant of) about 71st in an S shape.

Marous/Vintage has an option on that building, so I suspect that negotiation should be fairly straight forward given their vested interest in the 73rd St. tunnel.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 03, 2010, 09:33:29 PM
I have a lot of mixed concerns over the potential conversion. I use potential as we are still looking at 2013 at the earliest.

I have a hard time envisioning the shoreway as a place people will want to walk along. Sure, you can put in a grass median and add some decorative lampposts like every other streetscape project in America, but does that really improve the quality of life? Why would anyone want to walk along the shoreway, when they could use the paths that are actually at Edgewater beach?

The inaccessibility argument is also a bit of a stretch. Currently there are 3 pedestrian access points to Edgewater. These tunnels are not as bad as people make them out to be. Making at grade intersections could perhaps save 30-45 seconds to someone's drive time to the park.

I think this conversion to a blvd would be a great opportunity for Cleveland, but from everything I've seen the project looks ho-hum. Where's the creativity and ingenuity to actually make this a stunning project for Cleveland to brag about?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Etheostoma Caeruleum on March 04, 2010, 12:11:04 AM
I love the argument of some folks that since the city is losing population nothing should be spent to make it better. Now in some cases I agree with them--spending money on tourist follies like aquariums and casinos are not what this city needs. Attracting jobs and employers with large scale quality-of-life improvements for all residents (as I would consider this West Shoreway conversion) should be put at the forefront of our efforts.

I agree about the argument thing.....Casino sentiment I also agree...But the Aquarium, a really good one is by no means a folly. Maybe Jacob's roadside attraction guised as an 'aquarium' yes...But for CA, which is a totally different story and a not-for-profit entity, I think we could benefit from producing a better educated public concerning local and worldwide aquatic ecosystems---and how they relate and how their good health is essential to our daily lives.

Had we had such a philosophy ingrained in our population and business community years back, we may never had to deal with the burden of enduring this "river burning, etc" image for 40 years. That certainly did nothing to help our economy either. An iconic, educational cultural attraction like an aquarium can attract visitors, residents, offer many community outreach opportunities, field trips from other areas, jobs, and have spin of development in many ways. It boasts of a more "evolved" city in a way.

I suggest visiting Chattanooga, Baltimore, Monterrey Bay, Newport, Shedd for starters--and visiting the new CA website. Betwen Pitt and Chicago, there is a spot for our own unique venue--unlike casinos saturating the entire midwest like Wal-Marts.

Yes, we should try to attract what you're saying.....Yes we need some big players/anchors as part of the puzzle..... but let's also note that if we also do more to stimulate and offer incentives for smaller, locally owned, or independent businesses that diversify our economy to the point it will breed stability, then I think that is also better than hoping, praying, waiting and wishing for The Lone Ranger of one big company that we build our whole world around, to ride in and save the day and us. Build it all around one big or a few...they fall, we all all. Diversity breeds stability in the 'economic ecosystem' as it does in the natural one. One or two entities take a hit...several others left to pick up the slack.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on March 04, 2010, 06:46:36 AM
^^Think of it as a west side Lakeshore Blvd.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 07:13:55 AM
I'm still not sold on this.  People will walk along it to the extent it's lined with people-friendly stuff.  Which means no.  There's no density down there at all and everything to the north is warm-weather-only... and as noted, already pedestrian-accessible from the south.  The renderings we've seen show minimal new development fronting the blvd.  I'm not sure this will accomplish anything besides angering everyone in the northern half of Lakewood who works downtown.  After conversion it will still be a commuter road, just a far less effective one.  Too much loss for too little gain.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 04, 2010, 08:08:09 AM
Outside of the remaining parcels at Battery Park, the entire stretch of development leaves little room residential development. Much of the success of this project rests on the fate of Downtown Cleveland. As downtown loses jobs to Independence, Westlake, and I-271, the demand and desire to live in this part of Cleveland when the jobs are elsewhere is low.

I'd like to see this project take foot, but we can do a much better job with it than what the current plans are laying out.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 04, 2010, 08:31:30 AM
I'm still not sold on this.  People will walk along it to the extent it's lined with people-friendly stuff.  Which means no.  There's no density down there at all and everything to the north is warm-weather-only... and as noted, already pedestrian-accessible from the south.  The renderings we've seen show minimal new development fronting the blvd.  I'm not sure this will accomplish anything besides angering everyone in the northern half of Lakewood who works downtown.  After conversion it will still be a commuter road, just a far less effective one.  Too much loss for too little gain.

I disagree.  "Too much lost..."   What is being lost?  The argument about "angering Lakewood residents" and west side commuters doesn't hold water.  Reducing the speed to 35 mph from an assumed 60 mph (higher than posted) now along the 2-3 miles from Clifton to W. 6th will add maybe 2 mins.  Quite possibly less if you assume people will still drive 45 mph on the reconstructed blvd during rush hour times. 

Even if the traffic pattern is unchanged, the area is long overdue for a facelift.  Edgewater is one of Cleveland's best assets and should be promoted as such with better entrance signage, landscaping, lighting, etc.  This project will provide that.

The actual conversion of the Shoreway to a boulevard is the least important aspect of the project.  The improved connections for pedestrians and the multi-use paths is key to attacting development & investment back to the area.  While the project doesn't specifically create much NEW land for development (there is some new land created at W25th & Detroit), it will do more to make the area more attractive for sure.  The area of Herman from 65th to 49th will really improve from the project.  Business owners in the area will definitely benefit from the added traffic, even if it's only during "warm weather" months, which I'd rather define as April 1st to Nov 1st.  I think the housing in the area has already picked up based on this project as people have started to buy up some of the older homes that were bargains in the area.  These types of benefits are often unseen and difficult to quantify, but don't ever think they don't exist.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 04, 2010, 08:39:28 AM
The inaccessibility argument is also a bit of a stretch. Currently there are 3 pedestrian access points to Edgewater. These tunnels are not as bad as people make them out to be. Making at grade intersections could perhaps save 30-45 seconds to someone's drive time to the park.

As previously stated, at grade intersections are not an option.  Every possible attempt results in major backups at rush hour periods and the amount of traffic is too dangerous for pedestrian crossings.

As far as the condition of the current tunnels, I think you should check again.  The tunnel at 65th is really the only decent one.  I think the safety concerns at the other two get exaggerated, but the tunnels at 76th & Clifton are barely acceptable to walk on.  The stairs are crumbling, they are dark, damp and have no bike/wheelchair/stroller access.  I think the new plans are a great step forward with creative designs and use of interesting materials.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on March 04, 2010, 08:45:09 AM
Wouldn't this project open up all of the land directly north of the shoreway to development?  Looking at google maps there appears to be some nice sections of land that could be developed based on access to this new boulevard.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 08:55:51 AM
The actual conversion of the Shoreway to a boulevard is the least important aspect of the project. 

In that case it's a difficult cost to justify.  I'm in favor of promoting Edgewater, improving signage & lighting, ensuring pedestrian access, all that stuff.  Let's do it.  But if we don't have to tear up 6/20/2, if we don't have to stop traffic... let's not.  This town ain't dead yet and people have places to go.

I'd estimate the impact on commuters to be significantly greater than 2 minutes.  Thankfully at-grade intersections won't be involved... that idea was ludicrous.  If open highways were as ineffective as you suggest, there wouldn't be so many.  This issue holds SERIOUS water for Lakewood commuters.  I can't speak for anyone further west, and I really don't care what they think.  But many people in Lakewood don't want to be shoved further away from downtown, and that's what this kinda does.  It would negate a major benefit of living along 6/20/2.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 04, 2010, 09:01:29 AM
"I'd estimate the impact on commuters to be significantly greater than 2 minutes.  This issue holds SERIOUS water for Lakewood commuters.  But many people in Lakewood don't want to be shoved further away from downtown, and that's what this kinda does." 

Please expand on this.  I hear this argument so frequently but haven't fully understood it.  Are you talking about the inconvenience and slowdowns during construction?  Or after?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 09:15:42 AM
Are you talking about the inconvenience and slowdowns during construction?  Or after?

Have you ever commuted in the area we're talking about?  It means everything to some people, and I mean hardcore urbanites in Lakewood, not Avon.  Commuting is not just an exurban concern, it's an issue for a lot of people in Clevleand proper and the inner ring.

The answer to your question is both... during and after construction.  The during construction part is especially serious because 90 is about to be torn up too.  It would be a collosal planning blunder to do that simultaneously with this.  Furthermore there's just no reason to slow this road down, since it's wholly unnecessary for pedestrians to cross at grade... and the road itself is not remotely at grade with any of the  neighborhoods it's meant to help. 

Anytime you talk about changing people's commutes you're putting their very livelihoods on the table.  Not everyone who depends on this major artery will be able to adjust, or move, immediately.  There's gotta be a better justification for that than kind of upheaval than "Edgewater needs new signage."  Lovely.  Put up new signage, clean up the tunnels, maybe add another one or a bridge.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on March 04, 2010, 09:22:54 AM
^I really think you're blowing this out of proportion.  So people's commutes might increase by 5 minutes.  Is that really going to put anyones "very livelihood on the table"?  And if this conversion leads to development ON the road then I think it is completely worth it.

I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on March 04, 2010, 09:28:20 AM
"I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum."

That part, I'm in absolute agreement with. But um... commuting "problems" in greater Cleveland... that's always good for a chuckle.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 04, 2010, 09:33:13 AM
I commute that way daily.  I live in the area of Lake/Clifton so I'm very aware of the traffic speeds and how heavy it is at rush hour times. 

The issue of the I-90 reconstruction has also been brought up.  I can't believe it wasn't mentinoed at the last public meeting at Mt. Carmel, but considering Craig Hebbebrand of ODOT is the Project Manager for both projects, he is aware of the impact and has previously stated that they plan to redirect a fair amount of traffic to Rt 2 during the Innerbelt bridge construction.

I think what you and alot of folks are missing is the "calming effect" of slowing down the traffic, adding the landscape median, etc being promoted by the designers, and how it will make the area more desireable than having 60 mph traffic whizzing by.

Delays during construction are one thing.  I can't comment on that and won't even try.  But delays after it's completed I think are really going to be minimal.  Show me how an extra 2 mins in the morning & afternoon are too valuable for this project to go forward.  Or show me how delays are going to be significantly more than that because right now I just don't see it.  Of course we can also agree to disagree.  I'm unabashedly in favor of this project for alot of reasons.  Of course others feel opposite, fair enough.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 04, 2010, 09:39:26 AM
When I used to smoke, I'd fire up a cigarette as I pulled out of my parking garage in Lakewood. I'd finish the cigarette as I got off the Shoreway at Lakeside.

Six minutes.

Still, when I'd be staying downtown for a while, I'd prefer to take the bus. :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 04, 2010, 09:43:08 AM
When the project was first mentioned I was all for the at-grade intersections, but have since revised my thoughts on this.  I do support a "Lakeshore Drive" feel--with additional access points for the neighborhoods but unimpeded traffic flow.

But I also don't kid myself....at this point I'd be happy if we could get Clifton repaved and new sidewalks/crosswalks as Lakewood has done.  Like many of Cleveland's street's it's in bad need of some TLC.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 09:59:12 AM
I guess we agree to disagree on the 2-minute figure.  My previous career was in logistical planning.  I'd rather not go into detail but trust me I'm not just grasping at straws here.  My estimate is subject to change based on particulars of the design... but to me, 2 minutes barely even accounts for randomness in a situation like this.

We also disagree substantially on the benefit of this "calming effect."  Personally I think it results from horses eating.  There's so little for pedestrians here that I'm not sure who is actually impacted by cars whizzing by.  And I'm not sure what desirability factors arise from backing up traffic.  In fact, if I were appriasing property along a commuter roadway where traffic was about to be intentionally hindered I would be negligent not to reduce the value.  This would be different if 6/20/2 were a residential capillary ending in a cul-de-sac... but it isn't. 

And there is virtually no property fronting this roadway because it's at a completely different grade from neighborhood areas to the south.  I don't see the connection between hindering traffic on this road and improving life for Battery Park, which is up a steep embankment from it.  What benefit does "traffic calming" on 6/20/2 provide specifically to Battery Park?  They can hardly even be called adjacent, let alone intertwined.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 04, 2010, 10:08:52 AM
327 - You are correct about the Shoreway being on a differnt plan from Battery Park, but I can hear cars "whizzing by" plain as day from my neighborhood.  You make alot of valid points.  LOL at your "Horses eating" comment.

Cleburger - I am sooo with you on getting Clifton repaved to 117th.  I believe the powers that be are holding off repaving as long as possible because Clifton is slated to get the "boulevard" treatment as well with a landscaped center median, updated streetscape and bus stops too.  I don't have a timeline for construction but I know the project got federal stimulus money to start design on the project. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 04, 2010, 10:21:43 AM
I'm curious how property values have fared on Fairmont Blvd, a 35mph 'calmed traffic' main commuting artery.  I don't think residents there complain about it too much.  But I bet they'd go ballistic if someone proposed removing that median and increasing speeds to 50mph.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanomics on March 04, 2010, 10:22:51 AM
Generally speaking, decreasing the efficiency of auto traffic can have a positive impact on mass transit ridership.  Look at Chicago.  It's a pain in the a** to drive around there, Lakeshore Drive is backed up all the time.  But people who don't want to deal with it ride the train, take the EL, ride a bus.  In order for RTA service to improve, there has to be a supporting ridership, and making it a little harder to drive may help with that.  But that's for another topic.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Grumpy on March 04, 2010, 10:29:10 AM
I don't see the connection between hindering traffic on this road and improving life for Battery Park, which is up a steep embankment from it.  What benefit does "traffic calming" on 6/20/2 provide specifically to Battery Park?  They can hardly even be called adjacent, let alone intertwined.
Stand a hundred feet from a 55mph freeway, then go stand a hundred feet from a road with a 35 or 40mph speed limit. The difference is in the sound, and vibration.

For example, my house is about half a mile from a 5 lane 35mph road, and I can't hear a thing from that direction except the occasional siren. In the opposite direction about a mile away is a 6 lane 60 mph freeway that I can constantly hear a rumble from. If I walk to within a few blocks of that freeway, I can feel the ground vibrate when a large truck goes by. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bjk on March 04, 2010, 10:40:23 AM
I'm a Lakewoodite that takes this route every day - so I have a direct interest in it. That being said, I can think of a couple of points

Aren't the advantages of at-grade intersections near Edgewater Park almost totally negated by the presence of a major rail line at a substantial height, running parallel? Even if the Shoreway wasn't there, you still have to do lots of either tunnelling or bridging to get through that.

In terms of vibrations, this is already a no-truck zone. RTA buses are the only large vehicles on this stretch of highway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 10:41:39 AM
I'm curious how property values have fared on Fairmont Blvd, a 35mph 'calmed traffic' main commuting artery.  I don't think residents there complain about it too much.  But I bet they'd go ballistic if someone proposed removing that median and increasing speeds to 50mph.

Well, yes, there are houses right up on Fairmount.  Nobody's saying the section called "Clifton" that goes through the middle of neighborhoods should be 50 mph.  But no part of Fairmount is a commuting artery in the sense that the West Shoreway is.  Not even if you're commuting east to 271... and going the other way, Fairmount ends 5 miles out from downtown, in the midst of a dense neighborhood.  Apples & Oranges.

And as for encouraging transit ridership... why don't we just whip people with chains if they drive?  That'll learn em.  My take is that people are encouraged to use transit when it's practical to do so, like in Chicago.  Our problem isn't that the roads here are too good and need taken down a notch... it's that the transit isn't good enough.  And transit always sounds better when it's presented as adding options, not taking them away.

Re: vibration, welcome to the city.  Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day.  This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density.  If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that.  This here is a major city.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: willyboy on March 04, 2010, 10:46:26 AM
"I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum."

That part, I'm in absolute agreement with. But um... commuting "problems" in greater Cleveland... that's always good for a chuckle.

I know right...!   Whenever I hear this from someone in Cleveland, Its almost a given that they have never lived anywhere else.

(also funny that your arguing whether it will 2 minutes extra or more than that on top of the usual 6 minutes, yeah that sure is gonna be a quality of life changer!!!   :roll:)

I can see it now.  People wanting to move in droves because of this awful convenience......  to??.....

I know when I lived in Lakewood, the drive along the lake into downtown was priceless no matter how long it took (I certainly would have welcomed a slower speed to take it in longer). 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 11:15:22 AM
Guys, you don't have to believe me, but the potential delay numbers are a lot bigger than 2 minutes or 6 minutes or anything like that.  You're cutting the speed by a factor of 50% and assuming the resulting delays will be a much smaller proportion.  Mathematically... how?  Recall that inbound backups here can stretch past 117th and trap people in their driveways.  Assuming, arguendo, that I'm even close to right about this, would it change anyone's view?  Is there any threshold amount of delay that would indicate a problem, or are commuting issues simply unimportant here because--generally speaking-- the area has less traffic problems than LA?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Grumpy on March 04, 2010, 11:17:58 AM
Re: vibration, welcome to the city.  Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day.  This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density.  If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that.  This here is a major city.
Now you're arguing in favor of sprawl?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 11:27:39 AM
Re: vibration, welcome to the city.  Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day.  This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density.  If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that.  This here is a major city.
Now you're arguing in favor of sprawl?

If you expect city life to be quiet or free from vibration... then for you, yes.  Cities need density and effective transportation networks to be functional.  These core goals are at cross purposes with maintaining rural quietude.  Sprawl allows people live in relative silence and isolation from the rigors of commerce.  So if sprawl has to happen, I'd prefer that it not happen in the city itself.  Then all you have is sprawl.  Prioritizing rural virtues like quietude and "calm traffic" in an urban setting makes sprawl universal.  "Calm traffic" is really not an aspect of urban life.  Cities have action.  Cities have lots of people going places and lots of freight converging.  I think there's an extent to which these things, including their vibrational side effects, should be embraced.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 04, 2010, 11:35:20 AM
"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center.  It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers.  This is urban design 101 stuff.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Grumpy on March 04, 2010, 11:40:57 AM
I'm not arguing in favor of "rural quietude", I'm saying I enjoy having a conversation in a fairly normal tone of voice in my backyard or on the sidewalk with my neighbors. I'm sure there are exceptions but I would imagine most people living in the city would like that too. Asking people to take an extra couple minutes on a prettier calmer road so that the people living along this route can do that doesn't seem like such a big inconvenience to me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 11:47:17 AM
"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center.  It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers.  This is urban design 101 stuff.

I can see how that applies to Detroit Avenue, but... who window shops for tugboats and bulk salt?  And considering Detroit's right up the hill, how much window shopping do we really intend to add here?  There's also the RR tracks issue someone raised earlier.  Will those be calmed too?  It's a main freight line between NYC and Chicago where we also hope to run more passenger trains... maybe pedestians aren't equally appropriate for every single ROW.  And this isn't like the I-90 bridge where there's no parallel option for pedestrians or cyclists.  For the innerbelt I think ped/bike access is paramount.  I really think there's a fundamental distinction here.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MorningTheft on March 04, 2010, 11:52:55 AM
Guys, you don't have to believe me, but the potential delay numbers are a lot bigger than 2 minutes or 6 minutes or anything like that.  You're cutting the speed by a factor of 50% and assuming the resulting delays will be a much smaller proportion.  Mathematically... how?  Recall that inbound backups here can stretch past 117th and trap people in their driveways.  Assuming, arguendo, that I'm even close to right about this, would it change anyone's view?  Is there any threshold amount of delay that would indicate a problem, or are commuting issues simply unimportant here because--generally speaking-- the area has less traffic problems than LA?

If there are already backups to 117th, then why would it matter if the speed limit is 35 or 50?  No one can get up to that speed anyways.  So when its busy, the traffic won't move any slower than it does now, because its not going much faster than 35 now.  When its not busy, it will only take about 1 min longer (2 miles @ 35mph vs 2 miles @ 50mph)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 04, 2010, 12:01:40 PM
"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center.  It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers.  This is urban design 101 stuff.

I can see how that applies to Detroit Avenue, but... who window shops for tugboats and bulk salt?  And considering Detroit's right up the hill, how much window shopping do we really intend to add here?  There's also the RR tracks issue someone raised earlier.  Will those be calmed too?  It's a main freight line between NYC and Chicago where we also hope to run more passenger trains... maybe pedestians aren't equally appropriate for every single ROW.  And this isn't like the I-90 bridge where there's no parallel option for pedestrians or cyclists.  For the innerbelt I think ped/bike access is paramount.  I really think there's a fundamental distinction here.

I was only pointing out that calming traffic can and does happen in urban settings, and is often desirable.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 04, 2010, 12:06:35 PM
Guys, you don't have to believe me, but the potential delay numbers are a lot bigger than 2 minutes or 6 minutes or anything like that.  You're cutting the speed by a factor of 50% and assuming the resulting delays will be a much smaller proportion.  Mathematically... how?  Recall that inbound backups here can stretch past 117th and trap people in their driveways.  Assuming, arguendo, that I'm even close to right about this, would it change anyone's view?  Is there any threshold amount of delay that would indicate a problem, or are commuting issues simply unimportant here because--generally speaking-- the area has less traffic problems than LA?

I do logistics software for a living, why don't you explain

And really explain how going from 50 mph to 35 mph is a 50% reduction.....

Also explain why your commuting issue trumps my quality of life issues, because It really doesn't affect me negatively if you are stuck in your driveway on clifton.  Having to drive from 70th to 45th or the end of the shoreway does.  Having to drive to either place to simple get my car down to the park that I can throw a rock and hit is ridiculous.   

Perhaps Cleveland should design Cleveland streets to benefit people who live in Cleveland and not those who live in the suburbs especially since the 'burbs and its people have made it eminently clear that Cleveland is a wasteland they want nothing to do with.

Driving to 73rd instead affects me and everybody living in Edgewater, detroit shoreway and cudell positively.   Having traffic an 1/8 of a mile away going 35 instead of 50 does, more trees in the sea of concrete does.  Being able to bike along it does. So how much does that count?  2 minutes? 5 minutes?

don't like your commute, move or change jobs.

You want to drive 60 MPH go up to 90.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 12:09:05 PM
I'm not arguing in favor of "rural quietude", I'm saying I enjoy having a conversation in a fairly normal tone of voice in my backyard or on the sidewalk with my neighbors. I'm sure there are exceptions but I would imagine most people living in the city would like that too. Asking people to take an extra couple minutes on a prettier calmer road so that the people living along this route can do that doesn't seem like such a big inconvenience to me.

May I suggest West Park, for that purpose?  We're talking about a major industrial seaport with a highway and a busy rail line running through it.  Take away the highway and you really haven't changed much about the character of the area, not in the direction you're looking for.  There may be a low ceiling in that direction, really.  That's why I'm suggesting [benefit = small].  If nobody wants to believe me about [cost = big] I can live with that.  But if nothing else, please recognize that we're talking about a highly industrial port area.

I'm seeing a pattern recently... this isn't the first time I've taken the stance that not every quality-of-life development fits perfectly into every given industrial zone.  Did anyone seriously buy in Battery Park on the assumption that sometime soon there would no longer be a tugboat factory and a gigantic mining operation across the shoreway from it? 

Sometimes I feel like things are placed willy-nilly in Cleveland because there is such fierce resistance to considering the relationships of anything to anything.  So if "trendy urban development item A" is a cool idea on its face, and it worked great in an upperclass residential section of Berlin, then it's equally great for every possible location in Cleveland-- regardless of context.           

Ksonic99: 

Explain what?  Why I think travel time would double when speed is halved?  Why I think backups would take twice as long to clear if speed were halved?  That's not logistics, that's arithmetic.  If further explanation is needed let me know.

Qualifications-wise I don't want to get specific about my resume in an online forum.  I may have used your software before, and if so, cool.  But I would rather have you think me a liar than broadcast 327's secret identity to those who might recognize certain details. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 04, 2010, 12:22:12 PM

Ksonic99:  Because I don't want to get specific about my resume in an online forum.  I may have used your software before, and if so, cool.  But I would rather have you think me a liar than broadcast 327's secret identity to those who might recognize certain details.

well that is fine.

I choose to give your opinion 0 weight then.  You are more than welcome to do the same to mine.

and much like urban dwellers have heard since the fifty's  On this item, you have lost, get over it.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MayDay on March 04, 2010, 12:29:40 PM
At this point, I think you two should either take it to PM or simply move on.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 04, 2010, 12:33:27 PM
moved on.

to

allocating revenue on a billed, empty, total miles algorithm with 11 variables.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 12:46:52 PM
Likewise... I'm exhausted!  And your software intrigues me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: StapHanger on March 04, 2010, 12:52:34 PM
The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no?  Speed limits for short drives (which this is) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on March 04, 2010, 12:57:41 PM
The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no?  Speed limits for short drives (which this) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.

Correct, the speed limit shouldn't be an issue if there are no grade crossings.  Just slap a few speed cameras along there, and you'll have some extra revenue from the impatient ones (there will be many) who "just can't afford" that extra 90 seconds on their commute.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 04, 2010, 01:00:31 PM
I'm curious how property values have fared on Fairmont Blvd, a 35mph 'calmed traffic' main commuting artery.  I don't think residents there complain about it too much.  But I bet they'd go ballistic if someone proposed removing that median and increasing speeds to 50mph.

Well, yes, there are houses right up on Fairmount.  Nobody's saying the section called "Clifton" that goes through the middle of neighborhoods should be 50 mph.  But no part of Fairmount is a commuting artery in the sense that the West Shoreway is.  Not even if you're commuting east to 271... and going the other way, Fairmount ends 5 miles out from downtown, in the midst of a dense neighborhood.  Apples & Oranges.

Yes.  I was talking about Farimount as it relates to Clifton Blvd, and the Shoreway.  When they decided to (eeh gahst a traffic engineers worst nightmare) take a whole lane of rush hour traffic away from Cedar Hill from 4 to 3, did we see cataclysmic backups that destroyed property values on Fairmount? Nope.  The vast majority of the people who live on that section of Clifton are completely behind a shoreway blvd conversion as well as a blvd conversion of Clifton, with a tree lined median that calms traffic.  Most can't wait for this and think it will drive reinvestment in the neighborhood and help property values.  Call it Fairmount West.

We're talking about a major industrial seaport with a highway and a busy rail line running through it.  Take away the highway and you really haven't changed much about the character of the area, not in the direction you're looking for.  There may be a low ceiling in that direction, really.  That's why I'm suggesting [benefit = small].  If nobody wants to believe me about [cost = big] I can live with that.  But if nothing else, please recognize that we're talking about a highly industrial port area.

I'm seeing a pattern recently... this isn't the first time I've taken the stance that not every quality-of-life development fits perfectly into every given industrial zone.  Did anyone seriously buy in Battery Park on the assumption that sometime soon there would no longer be a tugboat factory and a gigantic mining operation across the shoreway from it? 

Sometimes I feel like things are placed willy-nilly in Cleveland because there is such fierce resistance to considering the relationships of anything to anything.  So if "trendy urban development item A" is a cool idea on its face, and it worked great in an upperclass residential section of Berlin, then it's equally great for every possible location in Cleveland-- regardless of context.           


Are we really calling this area a "major industrial seaport"?  Yes, there's a big salt mine, and a tugboat factory. The vast majority of that area is Edgewater Park, 2 marinas, and Whiskey Island.  With planned pedestrian linkages along the riverfront with a pedestrian bridge to whiskey island.  The vast majority of our "major industrial seaport" is to the east of the river and looks to be moving further east.  Are we seriously to think these willy nilly ideas of reclaiming industrialized lands overlooking the waterfront for prime residential and pedestrian usage, should be tossed aside because of the "relationships" of decisions to heavily industrialize them a century ago (even if it made sense then).  Or should we work to erase those now mistakes and reclaim this area in a productive way? 

You obviously look at this from a traffic engineering point of view.  That's fine, but I don't think you'll find most urban centric folks (particuarly planners) agreeing with you.  Really I guess it's a moot point.  This is moving forward, and I somehow doubt this is going to turn into US-405 in Califronia ("the parking lot").  I guess we'll see.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hts121 on March 04, 2010, 01:05:03 PM
All that I know is that access to Wendy Island needs to be improved dramatically.  I don't commute on the West Shoreway so, personally, I have no dog in that fight.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 01:10:58 PM
The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no?  Speed limits for short drives (which this) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.

It's shorter the further east you live.  Conversely, the further west you live in Lakewood, the more cumulative delay you will experience from this.  West Blvd is almost the end of the commute for a lot of people.  It was for me. 

On the inbound morning commute, conditions on this final stretch affect the entire road... not just the freeway part where the speed is to be changed.  At current speeds, problems on 6/20/2 can back up well into Lakewood.  Cut that speed in half, have something happen to close a lane or two temporarily, and the morning backup might reach anywhere from Bunts to West Clifton.  I'm guessing that's a worst case scenario, but it's conceivable, especially if 90 is also torn up.  Backups reaching west of 117th are not a projection at all... they were almost a daily occurrance within the past couple years.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 04, 2010, 02:42:59 PM
The shoreway's current grade and the slope of the surrounding areas will never allow for development along most of its path. The reduction in speed to 35 mph, is not a big deal IMO, however when cars start to drive along it at 35mph, it will feel like your car is idling because of perspective. There is no need for such low speeds when there are no neighboring buildings. Next time you are on driving on I-90, reduce your speed down to 40 and see what it feels like. That's exactly what it will feel like on the shoreway.

What also irks me is the tree lined boulevard concept! Trees lining the shoreway is the last thing we need. I thought the purpose was to create nice views, not grow towering trees that will completely block the view of the lake in a few years. It's not like we are Miami or LA with long slender trunks of Palms with a small canopy frawn.

Also, Why are we developing a road that is at least a 1/4 mile inland for pedestrian access? We don't need to be able to walk along the shoreway. We need to be able to walk along the SHORE. Why can't we fix up those sea walls that are lakeside to the Marina and convert into a beautiful boardwalk that extends into Whiskey Island? Then from there, create a pedestrian bridge over the Cuyahoga into downtown and the proposed new Flats East Bank development?

The last thing the shoreway needs is pedestrian access. Keep the shoreway for cars, develop the shore for people. A few more pedestrian bridges/tunnels from the Detroit-Shoreway Neighborhood to the lakefront is what is needed.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: majaba on March 04, 2010, 02:52:37 PM
My wife and I live north of Detroit on W. 54th and we're looking forward to having access to the shoreway/blvd right at our street, as well as a multipurpose trail to travel.  I think our property value will benefit as well.  And if bicycles are allowed on the blvd, that'll be a great ride.  All good stuff...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bumsquare on March 04, 2010, 03:24:32 PM
Just to clarify, the speed limit on the shoreway between W.6 and West Boulevard is 50 mph.  The speed limit will be decreased by thirty percent.  The shoreway has never really been a full speed freeway on the west side. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 04, 2010, 04:09:56 PM
WestBLVD I like your style.  You don't put tight clothes on a fat man.  I know the speed limit there is 50, but... very few people obey speed limits on freeways.  It's more like 60-70 there under normal conditions.  The guy going 50 might as well be a deer carcass.  The west shoreway may hook up with Clifton on one end, but it literally becomes I-90 on the other end.  There's no ramp or interchange, it's a seamless transition.  Do we really expect traffic coming westbound from I-90 to go from 75 to 35 as they pass Browns Stadium?  As far as national jokes go, dead man's curve will pale in comparison. 

Welcome to downtown Cleveland!  This way: dead man's curve.  The other way: dead man's sudden and desparate braking, even though it looks like the same road he's been on and nothing seems to have changed except OH MY GOD IS THAT SPEED LIMIT SERIOUS?  Am I on an exit ramp?  Is there a brick wall up ahead?  Oh, there's an exit, I'll try and turn around.  This can't be right.  Wait... did I just get off in the projects?  They put projects right on the lake?  I guess I'll just keep going the way I was.  OK, this looks like some kind of a... family recreation area... wait, no... I think it's a salt mine.  Is it both?  What the hell?  This isn't a town, this is random elements dumped out of a bag! 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MorningTheft on March 04, 2010, 04:34:13 PM
^Do you really think people around the nation are having a laugh about the I-90 Dead Man's Curve?  Doesn't every city have a bend that they call DMC?  The Jan and Dean song is about a DMC in LA.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Grumpy on March 04, 2010, 04:35:23 PM
If it is planned correctly, the transition from freeway to roadway won't be as jarring. I'm not saying it has been planned that well, but it could be. As an example I -480 ends and turns into St Rt 14 in Streetsboro and within a mile drops from 65 (though most traffic is doing 75) down to 35. I used to drive through there everyday and never had a problem transitioning. I don't see why it would be so much harder here.

Though I do have to say, if they're not going to bother with intersections, 45 would seem more reasonable even for a tree lined boulevard.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Clueless,Ohio on March 04, 2010, 04:43:31 PM

^ If the posted speed limit is 35, reality tells us that people can and will do 45.
The posted speed and the traveling speed are 2 different things.

Whatever you want it to be, post it lower.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on March 04, 2010, 04:48:49 PM
The last thing the shoreway needs is pedestrian access.

I disagree.  Do you work for ODOT?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 04, 2010, 06:09:22 PM
Regarding the tugboats and salt mines, isn't the point of a project like this to look to the future?  When Cleveland's quickly-shrinking industrial past is gone and the port moved east?  To make the entire lakefront more livable for residents with "new-economy" jobs?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 04, 2010, 11:45:42 PM
Yes, new-economy jobs are worth having. But so are basic-needs mining operations, shipping and advanced manufacturing. All can and should co-exist here. I don't want to see anyone forced out by this project.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Etheostoma Caeruleum on March 05, 2010, 04:02:25 AM
When I used to smoke, I'd fire up a cigarette as I pulled out of my parking garage in Lakewood. I'd finish the cigarette as I got off the Shoreway at Lakeside.

Six minutes.

Still, when I'd be staying downtown for a while, I'd prefer to take the bus. :)

I hope you didn't throw the butt outside!  :-D
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Etheostoma Caeruleum on March 05, 2010, 04:06:53 AM

^ If the posted speed limit is 35, reality tells us that people can and will do 45.
The posted speed and the traveling speed are 2 different things.
Whatever you want it to be, post it lower.

Agreed.. I always said the same thing regarding speed posts.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 05, 2010, 07:27:04 AM
I used to live in the suburbs north of Detroit and frequently commuted on Woodward Ave.  I think that's a similar situation to what might become of the Shoreway.  Speed limit was 45 mph, it was 4 lanes in both directions and moved through a commercial corridor.  Traffic moved very swiftly and in most cases was a better commute than the freeway.  There were cross traffic intersections at most mile & half mile marks, but traffic still moved pretty much uninterrupted.  It had a landscape median and sidewalks on either side.  Pedestrian crossings were very dangerous though, as you essentially had to get across 8 lanes of traffic in a short amount of time.  I think 2 people were killed at the intersection of 12 Mile Road & Woodward in the time I was there.  Very busy intersection for cars & pedestrians.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bumsquare on March 05, 2010, 07:47:14 AM
I've managed to drive the speed limit on the shoreway and I haven't even died.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 08:05:00 AM
Woodward Avenue is Detroit's equivalent to Euclid Avenue... a better comparison might be High Street in Columbus, although Woodward is much bigger than either of those.  But in any case, it's the main street of the entire city and is lined with commercial uses.  It hits the downtown of upscale Birmingham and other rich residential areas, after passing through miles and miles of Parma-like inner ring suburbs.

Admittedly Woodward gets a little freeway-like just south of Pontiac, but for the most part it's a (huge) surface street with 10 miles of city on either side.  It has intersections because it's smack in the middle of a massive street grid.  Other than a tiny piece in Highland Park, Woodward Avenue is NOT industrial, and at no point is it physically hemmed in like the west shoreway. 

It bears no resemblance --at all-- to a freeway along a lakeshore with heavy industry on one side and a steep bank on the other.  I would be pretty strongly against trying to replace our shoreway with something like Woodward Ave... because there's no way we could transport the rest of the central column of metropolitan Detroit to our west shoreway area. 

Context means everything.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bjk on March 05, 2010, 08:42:23 AM
Wouldn't the best comparison be to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: majaba on March 05, 2010, 08:59:26 AM
WestBLVD I like your style.  You don't put tight clothes on a fat man.  I know the speed limit there is 50, but... very few people obey speed limits on freeways.  It's more like 60-70 there under normal conditions.  The guy going 50 might as well be a deer carcass.  The west shoreway may hook up with Clifton on one end, but it literally becomes I-90 on the other end.  There's no ramp or interchange, it's a seamless transition.  Do we really expect traffic coming westbound from I-90 to go from 75 to 35 as they pass Browns Stadium?  As far as national jokes go, dead man's curve will pale in comparison. 
Welcome to downtown Cleveland!  This way: dead man's curve.  The other way: dead man's sudden and desparate braking, even though it looks like the same road he's been on and nothing seems to have changed except OH MY GOD IS THAT SPEED LIMIT SERIOUS?  Am I on an exit ramp?  Is there a brick wall up ahead?  Oh, there's an exit, I'll try and turn around.  This can't be right.  Wait... did I just get off in the projects?  They put projects right on the lake?  I guess I'll just keep going the way I was.  OK, this looks like some kind of a... family recreation area... wait, no... I think it's a salt mine.  Is it both?  What the hell?  This isn't a town, this is random elements dumped out of a bag! 

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

You lost me, Fonzie.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 09:00:51 AM
Are we really calling this area a "major industrial seaport"? 

Are we seriously to think these willy nilly ideas of reclaiming industrialized lands overlooking the waterfront for prime residential and pedestrian usage, should be tossed aside because of the "relationships" of decisions to heavily industrialize them a century ago (even if it made sense then).  Or should we work to erase those now mistakes and reclaim this area in a productive way? 

Regarding the tugboats and salt mines, isn't the point of a project like this to look to the future?  When Cleveland's quickly-shrinking industrial past is gone and the port moved east?  To make the entire lakefront more livable for residents with "new-economy" jobs?

We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.

EDIT: I hope this post makes more sense now.  It was originally intended as a direct response to these questions from the previous day, which had really gotten me thinking... but I neglected to put the quotes at the top, which kinda made it into of a random rant.  The last paragraph, however, was not responsive to any question.  It was more of a global point, but my transition is not well delineated.  Subheadings might even be appropriate here.  Oh well.   

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

You lost me, Fonzie.

[thumbs up] 

That's a good quip.  Now try articulating a position.

[rides off on bike]
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 05, 2010, 09:03:07 AM
Please tell this to the people living in battery park.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 09:06:40 AM
Please tell this to the people living in battery park.

I hope no one ever has to, and I trust that any needed remediation was done.  And every dollar spent on remediation is a dollar lost toward completing the project... at some point.  Battery Park has worked out.  SYC worked out, after a confusing drama with WalMart over who would pay for remediation.  City View, unfortunately, is flat out dangerous... and due to an oversight by the mayor, Garfield Heights is liable for the whole shebang, which I hope never actually goes shebang.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: majaba on March 05, 2010, 09:45:16 AM
We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

You lost me, Fonzie.

[thumbs up] 

That's a good quip.  Now try articulating a position.

[rides off on bike]


That was a funny response - I like the TV script format.  Truth be told, I'm nowhere near as articulate on things of this matter as you appear to be.  You made some great points - I just think they got lost behind some stretched numbers and your caps lock key.

I check out this forum to get some nice perspective on what's going on around town.  I'm a DS resident so this thread in particular interests me, as does the Shoreway project.  I see it as a benefit to those in the DS area.  I mentioned before that I live on W. 54th, so I'll get to enjoy not only an entrance to the new boulevard from my street, but also a multi-purpose trail and more access to Edgewater/Whiskey Island/etc.  The (potential) ability to ride a bicycle on the boulevard is also something to look forward to.

In my opinion, if you measure the positive impacts of the project versus the (potential) traffic issue - and that horse has been beaten dead - I think the project passes muster. 

   


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 10:16:51 AM
I'm highly supportive of a new entrance or two from the Battery Park area, and that seems to be the main aspect of this people want.  I didn't think additional access was ever really controversial.  And I'm a lot more supportive of the plan as a whole since they dropped the at-grade intersections concept. 

Some people here seem to be fighting for the original concept, which was about as realistic as a Popeye cartoon.  I'm pretty sure that plan was already dropped, for some of the reasons I've been discussing.  The plan now is to pretty much keep the freeway format. 

So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 05, 2010, 10:26:58 AM
Some people here seem to be fighting for the original concept, which was about as realistic as a Popeye cartoon. 

It was realistic until ODOT got involved.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on March 05, 2010, 10:28:17 AM
So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: willyboy on March 05, 2010, 10:30:01 AM
So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.

and the median, and the........  ? :wtf:?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 10:39:19 AM
So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.

The at-grade intersections issue seems resolved... though perhaps not permanently... and I believe many other aspects are still on the table, like the speed limit and the total project scope/cost.  Neighborhood access and traffic calming appear to be separate goals with separate merits.  My point there was that my positions on this are not tin-hat crazy, and that these issues have not already been settled to the contrary.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 05, 2010, 01:05:44 PM
We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.


If you really mean this, I don't even know what to say to you.   If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 05, 2010, 01:37:13 PM
Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

As I stated a few pages back, the tree lined concept seems kind of out of place as the purpose is to see the lake, not shroud it behind trees. It appears from the plan trees will only be planted on the south side, which already contain trees, just not in an orderly fashion.

I'm hesitant to believe that the pedestrian access will get much use. Anyone who lives in the Edgewater neighborhood of Cleveland will continue to use the nice paths that already exist along the beach cliff and then down the hill towards the beach and marina rather than using a proposed path along the shoreway. Residents in this area would have to go out of their way, away from the lakeside paths to use the shoreway side path to *enjoy* walking alongside a bunch of commuting cars. Folks who live in the Detroit Shoreway and Battery Park who currently use the tunnels at West 65th and West 76th will continue to use those points of entry to the park (albeit they should look nicer than they currently do). It should be pointed out, however,  that the entry point at West 65th is really nice as it is. When residents from these areas cross under the tunnels, they will most likely be headed towards the beach, marina, or Whiskey Island. It would be unlikely that a pedestrian would find it nicer to walk along the road once crossing under the tunnel versus using the already existing lakeside paths in Edgewater Park.

The proposed pedestrian route really only becomes a feasible entry point by non motorized means for those who live to the east of W 49th street as the shoreway pedestrian path is a direct shot to Edgewater. However, as any planner can tell you, a person is generally not willing to walk more than a half mile to get to their destination. Considering the park is a form of recreation, you can likely extend that distance a bit. However, since W 49th street is 1.2 miles from Edgewater Beach, it is unlikely the pedestrian use trail will get very high use in this vicinity.

The shoreway was designed to get people from the west side to downtown via car. The proposed redevelopment tries to force a pedestrian use out of the shoreway that is not warranted and not a feasible use for many local residents. I bike from the west side of Cleveland to downtown almost everyday in the summer and this proposed path does not even benefit me as the path still has to cross up to Detroit to cross over the Detroit/Superior Bridge, making it much easier and enjoyable to continue to bike down Detroit through the new Gordon Square district.

Perhaps this new shoreway will be good for our communities, but I truly believe that the shoreway should be left just the way it is and we actually use the money to develop a nicer SHORE.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 05, 2010, 01:48:30 PM
Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

I have to agree with this line, if not much else that anyone here has been arguing about back and forth for the last few days.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 05, 2010, 02:12:17 PM
If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.

I mean what I said, not what you said. 

Praying for industries to return has nothing to do with prioritizing land usage based on the nature and context of the land.  If you think that's asking too much then... we're at an impasse there.  And what buildings have I argued against reclaiming?  I mean, if I said it I said it, but what are you talking about?

And I never said we shouldn't remediate pollution.  I just said we don't have to do that before we build things, because we already have plenty of land to build those things on that doesn't need remediation.  Low hanging fruit means less upfront cost during a recession, thus more growth for our buck.  So yes, let's do the remediation... but let's do it with a higher tax base, let's not put it ahead of actual growth.

Instead we're putting new industry on Millionaire's Row... while putting neighborhoods and amenities where, in a thunderbolt of irony, industry happens to be the highest and best use.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tedolph on March 05, 2010, 02:45:36 PM
"thunderbolt of irony".  I like that.  I am going to use it. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 05, 2010, 04:59:06 PM
Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

I have to agree with this line, if not much else that anyone here has been arguing about back and forth for the last few days.

Then I guess you both missed the removal of both ramps at W. 25th and total reconfiguring of W. 28th?  Face it, a million doesn't buy much these days.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hts121 on March 05, 2010, 05:15:15 PM
For comparison, l believe the work that was recently done with Route 8 around Macedonia cost around $250 million
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 09:36:39 AM
If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.

I mean what I said, not what you said. 

Praying for industries to return has nothing to do with prioritizing land usage based on the nature and context of the land.  If you think that's asking too much then... we're at an impasse there.  And what buildings have I argued against reclaiming?  I mean, if I said it I said it, but what are you talking about?

And I never said we shouldn't remediate pollution.  I just said we don't have to do that before we build things, because we already have plenty of land to build those things on that doesn't need remediation.  Low hanging fruit means less upfront cost during a recession, thus more growth for our buck.  So yes, let's do the remediation... but let's do it with a higher tax base, let's not put it ahead of actual growth.

Instead we're putting new industry on Millionaire's Row... while putting neighborhoods and amenities where, in a thunderbolt of irony, industry happens to be the highest and best use.

  Well I guess I still don't know what you're talking about.  And I'm not exactly sure what "Millionaire's Row" has to do with the shoreway conversion and its development opportunities.  But Millionaire's Row died over a century ago.  Because, it was a residential area that was consumed by rapid development of commercialization and industry.  Which is what led to the development of Shaker Heights, wherein deed restrictions were put in place to keep commercialization and industry away.  The stretch of midtown you reference hasn't remotely been residential since.  And it is littered with decay of commercialization, industry and abandoned factories (what hasn't been torn down yet).  That land needs every bit of the expensive and slow remediation other areas do.  And there is not the slightest remnants of a residential neighborhood there.

  People's fascination with Millionaire's row always confounds me.  If someone proposed putting something remotely close to Millionaire's Row in Cleveland today it would probably be met with venom on a board like this.  Actually, Euclid Avenue wasn't even the first Millionaire's Row.  That distinction actually belonged to Water Street and Lake Road (currently W.9th St and Lakside).  Why was this area first built up as the homes for the elite?  Well it was because it sat on a bluff overlooking the river (on Water St. / W. 9th) and the Lake (Lake Rd. / Lakeside Ave.), and offered unparalled views of our greatest natural assets. Of course when these homes were gobbled up by commercialization and industry (late 1860's into the 1870's), most of those estates were rebuilt on Euclid Avenue until those were gobbled up by commercialization and industry (early 1900's-1910's), at which time most of the premier residential estates were built in Shaker Heights.  The photo below shows Cleveland's original lighthouse in 1872, at the corner of Water St. and Lakeside, pre shoreway, pre port land, when this was still the bluff.  The house you see behind it was one of the last homes left in this area, and as irony would have it, was the home of William Gordon.  That home was replaced by the National Terminals Building (there's that darn commercialization and industry again).  William Gordon started off in the hardware business, but rose to power and real wealth as a shipping magnate.  After amassing a fourtune in the shipping industry he did what a lot of tycoons did, development.  He moved his estate further east along the lakefront and upon his death deeded it to the city so long as it was always maintained as park land, giving us Gordon Park.  But he also mapped out an entire neighborhood on the near west side, now known as the Detroit Shoreway Neighborhood.  He built the Gordon Square arcade as the commercial centerpiece of this neighborhood, and actually w. 65th st, was originally known as Gordon Street.

  This thread started asking the question "how would the shoreway conversion, potentially affect development along it?".  It's a rapidly emerging neighborhood with a ton of great amenities.  It just so happened it's Northern terminus along the bluff was used for industry.  That industry is now gone.  One of the reasons that the Detroit Shoreway is primed to blossom and grow in a way few areas the rest of the city can fathom is because of that fantastic bluff. It's the same reason the original Millionaire's Row was located on the bluff downtown.  Unparalleled lake front vistas.  It's one of the main reasons Battery Park has been so successful.  The thought of course being that reimagining the shoreway, improving lake front access, and making the shoreway more pedestrian friendly and less of a barrier, can drastically accelerate what is already a blossoming and great neighborhood.  Buildings like the former Westinghouse Electric Factory can be reclaimed and added as additional high density residential to an existing neighborhood that already has the pieces in place to draw people.

  From a residents point of view, it's easier to be sold on moving in to a neighborhood that has residential and amenity infastructure in place.  From a developers point of view, because that infastructure is in place it's easier to pick off someone smaller scale projects and integrate them into the neighborhood, even phase them like battery park.  Where as areas like midtown have absolutely no neighborhood in place.  So if a developer starts small with a single building, it takes an enormous leap of faith on the residents behalf that a neighborhood will actually be created, knowing that for a while you are going to have very little around you.  Which is a big conondrum for the developer.  Ideally in such an area you would have to build some sort of mega development all at once, with hundreds and hundreds of units of housing, neighborhood retail and amenities.  And very unfortunately for us, the current lending climate makes that nearly impossible. Which means midtown lingers, but DS is primed for rebirth and growth right now by claiming the former industrial buildings on the bluff and improving pedestrian access.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 10:15:00 AM
Euclid Avenue is the main street of Cleveland, and most cities' main streets are not given over to industry.  That is not what "Main Street" is for, not on any level or in any situation.  The logic of this is so compelling, to most people, that I don't think I need to expand on it further.  I disagree strongly with your general view of Midtown but I won't get into that here.

I think you have mistaken my position regarding this or that industrial building on the bluff.  I'm not at all opposed to redeveloping these, particularly if the surrounding context indicates that industry is no longer the highest and best use for that area.  Clearly, such is the case with Battery Park.  The remediation numbers for something like this are a factor, but not necessarily a controlling one.  Don't conflate Battery Park with the West Shoreway.  I wasn't attempting to analyze BP's situation last week, only the shoreway proposal.  Each one is a different thing in a different context... so each one merits a different approach. 

The industry north of the shoreway, as well as elsewhere along our waterfront(s), is of a different class.  There is no way Euclid Ave or Battery Park, on the whole, would have remediation costs comparable with the heavier waterfront industries.  Nobody ever refined oil or made atom bombs on Euclid Avenue.   

There are and were limits to how filthy you can get without... sadly... an adjacent water source to dump in.  So these "reinventing the wheel" issues are far more significant when we're dealing with waterfront industries.  This is the case with the West Shoreway boulevard conversion, though not with Battery Park, which is not itself adjacent to any heavy waterfront industries.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 10:23:34 AM
take a look at these maps and tell me "where the industry is", and which is easier to develop as residential neighborhoods.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=1020+Huron+Rd+E,+Cleveland,+Cuyahoga,+Ohio+44115&ll=41.485273,-81.733775&spn=0.0077,0.021093&t=h&z=16

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=1020+Huron+Rd+E,+Cleveland,+Cuyahoga,+Ohio+44115&ll=41.504062,-81.648159&spn=0.007697,0.021093&t=h&z=16

euclid avenue in midtown has been primarily "industry" for about 100 years.  the shoreway conversion can dramatically impact everything west of w. 58th st, and the southern edge of the shoreway between 58th and 25th.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 10:35:01 AM
the shoreway conversion can dramatically impact everything west of w. 58th st, and the southern edge of the shoreway between 58th and 25th.

It sure could, but my notion of its "impact" is different than yours.

Look, you're attacking an argument I never made and a position I don't hold.  I never said we shouldn't redevelop D-S or BP.  I was talking specifically about the West Shoreway ROW and what we should or shouldn't do with that.  The context of that ROW is different from the context of neighborhood that is located up a cliff from it.  My point is that these two very different things may never interact in the way some are hoping for, which to me reduces the ROI of doing this conversion. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 10:45:31 AM
No they made Batteries...hence the name battery park. 

Where battery park is being placed used to have the worlds largest battery factory.....and of course lead needs no remediation, not like oil or anything?

why don't you just say "this will affect my commute negatively" and leave it at that? 

Going from 50 mph to 35 mph = 50% reduction in speed and a battery factory <> heavy industry...... you are not doing yourself or your arguments any favors.

Go here http://www.edgewaterpark.net/Some%20Edgewater%20History.htm and scroll down a little bit and check out the photo....Edgewater park as it existed in the past would sit completely under the current shoreway.

The parkview tavern used to sit just above a little park that was right on the lake...Just like Burke and the Port land, pretty much everything out from the bluff is landfill.  Which is why people making the helpful suggestion that we should close down burke and build on it are just plain stupid.  It is a toxic landfill,   it is the dredgings of the Cuyahoga....from the time when it was used as an open industrial sewer.
 
Edgewater used to look a lot like Hunnington beach in Bay village, very small beach, hard up against the bluff.

We already re-invented the wheel once...we turned a beach into a highway, and highly desirable residential land into industrial...we have also turned incredibly productive farmland into industrial/commercial/residential.

We are now in the process of changing Industrial/commercial into residential.

We (or at least I) get it...this will affect you negatively, so you don't like it very much.

It affects me positively.  and more importantly it is a positive for Cleveland.   If it negatively affects Lakewood and Rocky River......well they haven't been so concerned about the decline of Cleveland (I grew up in RR)  so my sympathy meter is pegged at 0.



 





Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 10:54:50 AM
Well then I guess I still don't know what you're talking about...

"If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there."

These former factory sites, are south of the shoreway.  They are prime for conversion to add to already existing neighborhood.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 11:16:40 AM
Well then I guess I still don't know what you're talking about...

"If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there."

These former factory sites, are south of the shoreway.  They are prime for conversion to add to already existing neighborhood.

I hope you didn't stew about this all weekend.  I guess it's my fault for dealign with more than one issue at a time.
Believe it or not, that quote was a throwaway line, one of many examples I raised to illustrate my main point, a point which had nothing to do with BP.  What is the thread title?  Not BP.  Up till that point, I don't believe BP had entered our discussion about the west shoreway and I had no intention of bringing it in via that line.  I was highlighting my overarching point about context.  I was not making a covert dig at BP and I apologize for not clarifying.

FWIW I'm inclined to believe BP could be a lot closer to done right now if its location were 100% appropriate for such a thing.  That doesn't make the site inappropriate... it's just a factor to be weighed.  And I did mention last week, didn't I, that even if remdiation isn't prohibitive it's still a cost, and it has to come out of some budget somewhere. 

Anyway, there's nothing to be remediated, that I know of, in converting the shoreway to a family recreation area... but that doesn't mean the context is real good for that idea either.  Again, two different issues, with commonalities and distinctions.   No matter how hard you try, you can't make me be opposed Battery Park.  I'm not.  I'm opposed to the boulevard conversion.

why don't you just say "this will affect my commute negatively" and leave it at that? 

Going from 50 mph to 35 mph = 50% reduction in speed and a battery factory <> heavy industry...... you are not doing yourself or your arguments any favors.

We (or at least I) get it...this will affect you negatively, so you don't like it very much.

It affects me positively.  and more importantly it is a positive for Cleveland.   If it negatively affects Lakewood and Rocky River......well they haven't been so concerned about the decline of Cleveland (I grew up in RR)  so my sympathy meter is pegged at 0.

Well, that's... one way... to reduce a complex issue.  No one shall consider anything outside of their immediate interests, eh?  The narrative setup of Donkey Kong has more depth.

My commute is a rail commute from the east side, so that's not the deal here.  As always, you don't have to believe me.  Go ahead... fiddle with the speed numbers.  Same argument still applies.  If you go from unenforced 50 (which=70) to enforced 35 (enforced since it's new), that's 50%.  I thought we'd already been through that.

Go ahead... assert that the construction of Battery Park negates every possible environmental concern anyone might raise.  Ignore the fact that there have always been houses near the Eveready plant, but that the same can't be said for the upriver flats.  There are no distinctions between these two things, industry is industry, regardless of how many different kinds of industrial zoning Clevleand has.  Is that what you're saying?

What really matters is "boulevard vibrant greenspace" or some such combination of buzzwords. Any argument that raises issues outside this paradigm must have some "automatic win" button in it somewhere, right?  Attack the speaker ad hominem!  That always works.  Because the buzzword paradigm shall prevail. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hts121 on March 08, 2010, 11:46:22 AM
I think we are making progress...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 11:48:18 AM
the west shoreway conversion has everything to do with battery park, and any future like developments, which the shoreway conversion is attempting to encourage.

remediation is an issue just about everywhere in cleveland, this is the result of being a city that was born and had accelerated development during the industrial revolution.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 12:09:31 PM
the west shoreway conversion has everything to do with battery park, and any future like developments, which the shoreway conversion is attempting to encourage.

remediation is an issue just about everywhere in cleveland, this is the result of being a city that was born and had accelerated development during the industrial revolution.

As to both statements I partially agree and partially disagree. 

I don't think this will help BP to the extent others do, because I think its utility in its proposed role is more limited than others do.  That is largely an industrial issue, though it's not at all a remediation issue.  Two.  Separate.  Things.  This here is not an issue of former industry.  This is an issue of currently active industry, which isn't going anywhere, and whether or not the land immediately adjacent to it is our best choice for casual recreation. 

My last point on remediation is that no, it's not even close to being the same kind of issue for every plot of land in Cleveland.  If that were true we couldn't live here.  Some plots are a lot dirtier than others.  I don't understand how this particular issue is controversial.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 12:16:05 PM
Your right, some plots are a lot dirtier than others... which is why I found it absolutely perplexing that you were bringing the harshaw chemical plant located by the steel mills off Harvard Road, into any sort of conversation about the West Shoreway.  None of the properties targeted for reinvestment via the shoreway project are anywhere near something like that.  They are extremely similar to the battery park development.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 12:19:20 PM
That is nonsense Go from unenforced to enforced.  You don't get to just "make stuff up"

50 to 35 <> 50%   70 to 50 <> 50%....so you give your side of the argument the most favorable treatment and the opposing side the worst?

I don't need to "fiddle" with any numbers....it has already been done for you, more than once in this very thread...the ACTUAL numbers, no fiddling necessary.

The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no? 

It is telling that you need to Fiddle, discount direct counter examples and pretty much just make stuff up.

You sir are not discussing in good faith.

Battery Factory = heavy industry and requires remediation.....how hard is it for you to even consider conceding a  point?

Your argument was that the area north of the shoreway was comprised of heavy industry and required so much remediation that any other use was not worthy of considering.......The area SOUTH of the shoreway also consists of heavy industry....which has been successfully remediated and re purposed for residential use.

Properties in battery park are selling for north of $200,000 (prices starts at $200,00 and rise rapidly from there) the next 2 projects to the west are selling for 240,00 to 350,000.

How many neighborhoods in cleveland can claim that?  especially considering it is the former site of a battery plant and not some (relatively) clean warehouse or a former greenhouse? 

Downtown, Tremont, edgewater (north of Clifton/lake) perhaps Westpark? 

This project will Improve

Detroit shoreway.
Edgwater
Cudell
Ohio city
Everybody's access to Edgewater.

at the minor inconvenience of northern lakewood and possibly rocky river.

See, I concede the point that commute times from lakewood will increase.

Look I will even concede a secondary point....during rush hours the "accordion" affect of traffic WILL increase the commute times by more than the 2 minutes..the delay will be exacerbated the further north and west you are.

It will also cause some people to decide to use 90 instead of the shoreway for thier commute.

This will cause slightly longer commute times on 90.

See I can accept that 2 minutes isn't the "complete answer" 

but at 5 minutes or even 10 minutes in aggregate, it is worth it.....not  only is it worth it to me, the powers that be have determined that it is worth it overall.

ODOT, US Dept of transportation, NOACA, Cuyahoga county.....have all been given some sort of opportunity at input, and the project has been deemed worthy.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 12:25:19 PM
Allright Ksonic99, my point about the speed has now been soundly defeated by you.  With your sword.  Now what about the rest of the issues?  And have you yet read the part about no I don't live there and I'm not fighting for my own commuting convenience... because you were pretty sure about it earlier. 

You seem extremely concerned with defeating me because you like this project and I don't.  That's my read of your position, but I'm not going to suggest you're attempting to mislead everyone, even though you've already stated quite clearly (and falsely) where I live. 

Stick to the issues.

Your right, some plots are a lot dirtier than others... which is why I found it absolutely perplexing that you were bringing the harshaw chemical plant located by the steel mills off Harvard Road, into any sort of conversation about the West Shoreway.  None of the properties targeted for reinvestment via the shoreway project are anywhere near something like that.  They are extremely similar to the battery park development.

But... but ... the shoreway is still right by the salt mine and the tugboat factory, regardless of any remediation issues or lack thereof.  That's my actual point and has been all along.  I keep trying to tell you there is no remediation issue with the shoreway... that was noted an example of a type of thinking... it is not a specific issue involving the shoreway, and never was.  I'm talking about the present and future of industry along the shoreway, not the past.  These arguments are not directed at anything up the cliff from the shoreway. 

I keep mentioning this "up the cliff from" element because that's part of my reasoning in suggesting that the shoreway conversion may not be as beneficial as is hoped.  These neighborhoods are physically separated from the lake by a lot more than just the shoreway, and changing the shoreway will not change the basic geography of the situation.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: majaba on March 08, 2010, 12:32:33 PM
"Go ahead... fiddle with the speed numbers.  Same argument still applies.  If you go from unenforced 50 (which=70) to enforced 35 (enforced since it's new), that's 50%.  I thought we'd already been through that."

Are "unenforced" and "enforced" speeds something engineers and consider when analyzing queueing systems?  Do cops decide to enforce speed limits in "new" areas only?  Have you ever driven 70 miles per hour on the somewhat narrow and curvaceous shoreway bridge (by the stadium) in any direction?  Especially when there is a higher volume of traffic?

If you tell me you have served in the fields of engineering, traffic enforcement, and racecar driving I am on board with your argument. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 12:33:15 PM
and where has anyone said, that the shoreway is supposed to do anything about the tugboat factory and salt mine?  and because that area exists, it's not worth it to help rebuild all the other areas around it to the south, and increase access to the public lakefront that does exist? :wtf:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 12:35:09 PM
I keep mentioning this "up the cliff from" element because that's part ot my reasoning in suggesting that the shoreway conversion may not be as beneficial as is hoped.  These neighborhoods are physically separated from the lake by a lot more than just the shoreway, and changing the shoreway will not change the basic geography of the situation.

Yes...and Hunnington beach is separated from Bay Village by a cliff.

The cliff isn't the impediment...it is the 6 lane divided highway.  with 1.5 access points over a 3 mile span.  65th is the only one that anyone currently actually uses, and the only one anyone not walking CAN use.  no bikes, no rollerblades, no wheel chairs, no strollers.




Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: willyboy on March 08, 2010, 12:49:29 PM
"Go ahead... fiddle with the speed numbers.  Same argument still applies.  If you go from unenforced 50 (which=70) to enforced 35 (enforced since it's new), that's 50%.  I thought we'd already been through that."

Are "unenforced" and "enforced" speeds something engineers and consider when analyzing queueing systems?  Do cops decide to enforce speed limits in "new" areas only?  Have you ever driven 70 miles per hour on the somewhat narrow and curvaceous shoreway bridge (by the stadium) in any direction?  Especially when there is a higher volume of traffic?

If you tell me you have served in the fields of engineering, traffic enforcement, and racecar driving I am on board with your argument. 

And if thats the argument than Im even more for decreasing the speed limit just for safety reasons alone.  70mph is way too fast for such a short and curvy stretch. :|   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 12:52:16 PM
and where has anyone said, that the shoreway is supposed to do anything about the tugboat factory and salt mine?  and because that area exists, it's not worth it to help rebuild all the other areas around it to the south, and increase access to the public lakefront that does exist? :wtf:

No, all those things are good, but none of them require any major alteration to the shoreway, and I don't think a major alteration to the shoreway will advance those causes much.  We appear to disagree on that.  So be it.  My point about the tugboats and the mine is not that the shoreway project should "do" anything about them... just that their presence should be considered when we consider the shoreway. 

In short, I think there's a stronger relationship between the shoreway and what's north of it, than between the shoreway and what's south of it.  And I don't believe we can do much to change those relationships, because the issues involved-- primarily the location of the tugboats and mine, and of the RR tracks-- are constants and not variables.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 01:01:16 PM
and where has anyone said, that the shoreway is supposed to do anything about the tugboat factory and salt mine?  and because that area exists, it's not worth it to help rebuild all the other areas around it to the south, and increase access to the public lakefront that does exist? :wtf:

No, all those things are good, but none of them require any major alteration to the shoreway, and I don't think a major alteration to the shoreway will advance those causes much.  We appear to disagree on that.  So be it.  My point about the tugboats and the mine is not that the shoreway project should "do" anything about them... just that their presence should be considered when we consider the shoreway. 

In short, I think there's a stronger relationship between the shoreway and what's north of it, than between the shoreway and what's south of it.  And I don't believe we can do much to change those relationships, because the issues involved-- primarily the location of the tugboats and mine, and of the RR tracks-- are constants and not variables.
Developers disagree with you as well.  and i don't see the point of holding back all the potential great impact because of the roughly 1/3 stretch of land to the north which has a salt mine.  Actually i think it's kind of cool to be able to look out your window, or sit on a restaurant patio and watch the activity at the salt mine.  And the shroreway has almost no interaction with the salt mines to the north.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 01:01:40 PM
I see you completely ignore the other things north of the shoreway..

Like 2 parks and 3 marinas.  which occupy more area than the salt mine/tugboat factory.

And while the salt mine probably isnt going any where any time soon....perhaps with increased access the tugboat factory might find it better to sell the land they have now and move over to scranton peninusula or the port land.....hell if you make the property valuable enough there is nothing stopping the sale of the land the mine head occupies to a developer.  all of the salt is miles under the lake  there is no real need to have the mine head where it is except that is where it has always been.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on March 08, 2010, 01:11:47 PM
.....hell if you make the property valuable enough there is nothing stopping the sale of the land the mine head occupies to a developer.  all of the salt is miles under the lake  there is no real need to have the mine head where it is except that is where it has always been.

And the ENORMOUS expense of moving a vertical mine shaft entrance to another location.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
Oh and I was using "you" the same way you were...

Placing yourself in the shoes of somebody having to exit their driveway onto clifton during rush hour...that was pretty much your argument until it got crushed.

You kept putting yourself there, to the detriment of everybody who will benefit from this...then you spent 3 pages defending your made up numbers.

What have we deconstructed so far.

speed
heavy industry/remediation
grade separation

You are also completely ignoring that the plan will now have a multi purpose trail from West blvd to west 25th st.

which means there is actually an opportunity to ride your bike from the near west side to edge of downtown (the end of the Detroit superior bridge)  without having to fear riding in traffic, and at some point connecting to the towpath trail.




Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 01:13:39 PM
It doesn't matter if there are also amenities along the shoreway, because their existence does not cancel out that of the industry.  And they're reachable thru other means.  WestBLVD explained this aspect very nicely last week. 

That tugboat factory just made a major investment in their facilities here, which is why the Whiskey Island alternative for the port move was summarily dropped.  They aren't leaving.  And are you suggesting the mine have all its operations off shore?  Bottom line, that stuff is not mobile.

And looking out your window at something is very different from extending a family walking path right up next to it and making major changes to the adjacent roadway.  Clearly you guys believe there will be a lot of beneficial impact from slowing down this road and putting in sidewalks... I disagree.  And that's leaving aside the issues of negative impacts, on which we also disagree.  I'm happy to clarify my position, but I'm not sure anyone's convincing anyone of anything here.  A lot of it rests on our underlying views and theories.

And Mr. Ksonic, I'm not sure anyone got "crushed."  The Clifton thing actually happened, it was not a suggestion or prediction.  I did once live in Lakewood and commute on this road.  I no longer do... just to get that cleared up.  But the traffic backups a couple years ago were quite real.  Your statement about my commuting motivation suggested that I've been dishonest here to protect a personal interest.  Again, stick to the issues.  And realize that your view of the scorecard is your own, as it is for each of us.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 01:22:41 PM
wow...cant win the argument attack the person.

fair enough.

I used to live at 104 and lake....I have made the West shoreway commute.

my anecdote is just as valid as yours.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Avogadro on March 08, 2010, 01:34:45 PM
Does it matter for the purposes of this admittedly circular argument that neither Cargill nor Great Lakes Towing uses the West Shoreway except for access to the W. 28th and W. 25th ramps, all of which will be improved because of the West Shoreway project?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 3231 on March 08, 2010, 01:35:19 PM
Let's cool it down or we'll lock and clean up the thread.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 01:41:10 PM
wow...cant win the argument attack the person.

fair enough.

I used to live at 104 and lake....I have made the West shoreway commute.

Is there an echo?  I've been fielding ad hominem material all day here, and I don't recall dishing much out.  If you don't like my numbers, supply numbers of your own.  Don't go after me because you don't like the assumptions I made.  Tell us why they're wrong... not why I'm bad.

And again, traffic backups on Clifton were a reality in the recent past.  I was there.  I was coming from Warren Rd, and by the time I got to 104 I had already been creeping for 1/2 hour sometimes.  It varied.  I stated last week that the further west one enters the road, the more backup one will deal with, because the bottleneck was at the eastern end then, as it would theoretically be under this plan.  By 104 we'd almost gotten through the entire backup, because once we finally got on the freeway part we got moving again in a hurry. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 08, 2010, 01:41:22 PM
I dunno, this has been remarkably mild for an internet "discussion"

The inter-tubes don't do nuance,   My wife and I end up "fighting" over e-mail when we are saying the same thing.   I suspect that this happens quite a bit to most people.

...the smiley face is not the end all be all.

I will tell you this Mr. 327  reading your comments next to a bug eyed, vein popping avatar adds a certain "flavor" to your comments--he looks a lot like my uncle Jimmy who gets drunk at thanksgiving and rants about how the world has gone to heck.  It is your choice, but if you want a better level of discourse you might want to switch to a puppy....nobody I know would "kick" a puppy, just sayin'.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 01:49:33 PM
I had no idea Captain Kirk would affect people so!  Live and learn.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 01:51:31 PM
I'm just still curious why the cargile salt mines are such an impediment or reason for not doing anything with the shoreway?  They don't really use the shoreway.  They aren't even really that close to the shoreway.  there's the garret morgan water treatment plant, the river, and then the salt mine and tug boat factory.  And yet we're supposed to believe that their very existence should prohibit doing anything with this road or land to the south and west of it? Or that their existence should mean that no person should ever walk or bike anywhere within a 1 mile radius of it?  Perhaps we should close down wendy park... wwwwaayyyy to close to those operations.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on March 08, 2010, 02:07:17 PM


I will tell you this Mr. 327  reading your comments next to a bug eyed, vein popping avatar adds a certain "flavor" to your comments--he looks a lot like my uncle Jimmy who gets drunk at thanksgiving and rants about how the world has gone to heck.  It is your choice, but if you want a better level of discourse you might want to switch to a puppy....nobody I know would "kick" a puppy, just sayin'.

Hmmm....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 02:15:51 PM
Again, land to the south is not involved in my argument, unless you mean something like 10 yards to the south of the ROW.  And I hadn't even mentioned the treatment plant, good call.  There's another thing that makes its immediate area less than ideal for outdoor recreation.  I'm not saying you can't possibly have outdoor recreation next to a salt mine, and a treatment plant, and a tugboat factory.  It just wouldn't top my list of investment ideas.  My theory is that we should locate things, all things, where we can get the most out of them, and where each thing can be the best thing it can be.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 08, 2010, 02:20:55 PM
but land to the south is the targeted investment area, that's the point of the project.  and the shoreway conversion will aid in that investment.  and with 2/3 of the land to the north edgewater park... well... Have you even looked at the target investment areas?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 08, 2010, 05:48:45 PM
Have you even looked at the target investment areas?

Not only am I personally familiar, I've sat through long and detailed reports about them.

I think this is about played out.  We agree on some points.  The neighborhoods will benefit from additional access to the shoreway.  I'm wholly in favor of that.  It's the speed limit and the re-configuration I don't like, and I'm not the only person with that opinion, even though I pretty much am the only one in this here sample. 

Please note that I used to be in favor of the entire project, traffic lights and all, but in my efforts to convince others I found myself convinced by them.  It happens... and it's the reason I believe in really talking things through.  I always appreciate when others are willing to join in that.  No matter who "wins" I think this ultimately leads to better decisions and a stronger community.         
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 08, 2010, 07:54:44 PM
Fuzzy math aside, I noticed a surveying crew working on Clifton between the Shoreway and West Blvd today. 

Hopefully it's a part of the design money for the Clifton to W 117th project and will get the street at least redone, with nice new sidewalks, crossing and maybe a median (and a paltry 35 MPH sort-of enforced speed limit)?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on March 09, 2010, 06:47:44 AM
^They need to make Clifton FEEL like a 35 mph street.  People will drive as fast as they feel comfortable.  It's pretty easy to get up to 50 mph on Clifton since it feels like a 6 lane highway at times.  A median would help.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 09, 2010, 07:02:24 AM
Clifton needs a trolley.  That's the reason it's so wide in the first place.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 09, 2010, 07:10:01 AM
Clifton was a two-lane road when the streetscars ran down both sides of it (one track or 12 feet per side). The street had huge front yards along it which were cut back to widen the road to a seven-lane boulevard in the late 1940s.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 09, 2010, 07:17:00 AM
Interesting... we lost the trolleys and added more lanes, though not necessarily at the same time.  Time to put the trolleys back.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tedders55 on March 09, 2010, 08:08:38 AM
Where did the trolleys run to and from?  All the way to DT or was it a shorter route? 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 09, 2010, 10:33:30 AM
Where did the trolleys run to and from?  All the way to DT or was it a shorter route? 

Two separate rail services used the Clifton tracks. One was the Cleveland Railway Co. (predecessor to the Cleveland Transit System and later RTA), which operated the city's streetcar system. Its operation down Clifton began at the carbarns just east of the Detroit Ave bridge over the Rocky River (where the apartment buildings are now). They ran northward up Sloane Avenue to West Clifton, under the Nickel Plate RR (today's Norfolk Southern), then east on Clifton to Lake (at Don's Lighthouse Grill), then down Detroit Avenue and through the subway deck of the Detroit-Superior Bridge. The Clifton streetcar line ended service on Nov. 16, 1947 and was replaced by buses.

The second rail service to use these tracks was the Lake Shore Electric, an electric interurban railway. Until May 15, 1938 it used all of the above routing of the Cleveland Railway Co. West of Rocky River, the LSE traveled on its own 80-mph double-track electrified routing about 500-2000 feet south of Lake Avenue, all the way to Lorain. It had two branches to Elyria. From Lorain, the LSE continued west on single track on two routes -- one through Sandusky and the other through Norwalk before coming back together at Fremont to head to Toledo. Through another electric interurban, the LSE offered through service to Detroit. It offered passenger and light-freight services.

Interesting... we lost the trolleys and added more lanes, though not necessarily at the same time.  Time to put the trolleys back.

Yes, at the same time. We lost the streetcar tracks on Clifton to gain the added lanes.

As noted above, streetcar service on Clifton ended in November 1947. This photo was taken in the winter of 1948 as road construction plans by Cuyahoga County Engineer Albert Porter were finalized. This view looks west on Clifton from West 117th Street. The streetcar tracks are inactive, awaiting removal when spring comes...

(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/rail%20history/CliftonW117th1948-2.jpg)

County Engineer construction crews can be seen working in 1948 on widening Clifton on the Cleveland side of West 117th Street, again looking west into Lakewood where work has yet to begin....

(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/rail%20history/CliftonW117th1948.jpg)

This is how wide Clifton was in 1941 -- two lanes with huge lawns and the unique side of the road operation of the Cleveland Railway Co. (and Lake Shore Electric before 1938).....

(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/rail%20history/Clifton1941WestView.jpg)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 09, 2010, 10:41:06 AM
Interesting... we lost the trolleys and added more lanes, though not necessarily at the same time.  Time to put the trolleys back.

Yes, at the same time. We lost the streetcar tracks on Clifton to gain the added lanes.


So, at no point were commuters just told to shove it... we switched modes, quite wrongly, but we never simply cut capacity on this route without replacing it.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tedolph on March 09, 2010, 10:57:05 AM
Sigh, is there any way any of this could be revived?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 09, 2010, 11:14:44 AM
Interesting... we lost the trolleys and added more lanes, though not necessarily at the same time.  Time to put the trolleys back.

Yes, at the same time. We lost the streetcar tracks on Clifton to gain the added lanes.


So, at no point were commuters just told to shove it... we switched modes, quite wrongly, but we never simply cut capacity on this route without replacing it.   

Yet in 1950 the city population was double (perhaps more) what it is now.   So the capacity issues were vastly different, especially on the Clifton stretch of the city border.

I don't buy this argument of affecting a commute by adding a median to Clifton or the Shoreway. 

Humans are adapting creatures.  Even those that live in outer-ring suburbs.  :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 09, 2010, 11:24:46 AM
Outer-ring suburbs like Lakewood, which itself is denser than many major cities?  This "us vs them" business is not helpful to anything we advocate.  It needs to go... at least in regard to freaking Lakewood.  Come on.

I realize some Lorain County folks will hop off 90 and onto the Clifton in a pinch... but it's not exactly a quick maneuver... are you suggesting Clifton gets substantial commuting use from exurbanites?  That's conceivable, but it seems unlikely.  I think it's mostly the northern end of the former Rockport Township that uses Clifton.  I-90 is too much more direct for people west of Rockport.

And in 1950 half the workforce stayed home, so that would presumably even out.  And I don't think the downtown workforce has shrunk proportionally... far fewer people work at small operations in the city and inner ring the way they used to.  Jobs now are seemingly more concentrated downtown and in the outer ring.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: CBC on March 09, 2010, 11:24:48 AM
Wow. The intersection of 117th and Clifton looks about the same today (minus the streetcars of course) As far as the houses on Clifton go, yes the road is closer today, but it really doesn't look like they lost much in the front yards because of the rail beds.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on March 09, 2010, 11:53:57 AM
Sure, got a few hundred million dollars sitting around?

We can discuss it more at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,10253.0.html

I've enjoyed our sidetrack. Now back to the West Shoreway....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 09, 2010, 09:08:13 PM
What really are the goals of this project?

Anyone who really thinks this will provide greater accessibility to Edgewater Park should look at the plan. There really aren't any new access points being added to Edgewater via tunnels or bridges. All we are getting is a spruced up version of the access points that already exist. If you want to get to the park, you will still access it through the same underpasses as you do today (lake/clifton, W 76th, W 65th).

Second point to make, a multi-purpose path ALREADY EXISTS between West Blvd and W 65th. The addition of a multi-purpose path along the shoreway from these two roads does NOT provide greater accessibility to the park as it BYPASSES the park to the south. The stretch of multi-purpose path being created from W 65th and to the east doesn't increase accessibility to Edgewater because the walking distance is still the same as if you took the sidewalk to W 65th and used that underpass. As I stated last week, the neighborhoods around W 45th to W 25th are over a mile from Edgewater. The amount of foot traffic that would use this section will be negligible.

I'm tired of this project being touted as an accessibility to Edgewater project. Where are the additional underpasses, bridges that people will use to access the park?

I'm also skeptical of a landscaped median. It's going to be hard to grow anything in this section of road because of the wind swept sand effect of Edgewater and the salting necessary to keep this stretch of road going in winter. I'm afraid we'll have a landscaped median that looks like the dead, brown grass median of Chester Ave.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 10, 2010, 06:34:23 AM
WestBlvd - you can't just pick & choose the items about the project that you don't like, and then classify the entire thing as a boondoggle.  What about the ramp reconfiguring at 25th & 28th?  What about the underpass at 73rd?  The connection at 54th?  Your comment that the ramps at Clifton & W. 76th are fine?  Seriously?  I  walked down the 76th tunnel last night and it was a mess.  Dark, damp, crumbling stairs is your idea of fine accessibility?  People who have lived in this area for years and have recently bought in want & deserve more.  Edgewater is one of the city's best assets and should be promoted as such.  Now it's like an afterthought and if people can get down there fine, if not fine.

Surprised to see you're a student in the MUPPD program at CSU.  So am I. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 10, 2010, 06:53:18 AM
WestBlvd - you can't just pick & choose the items about the project that you don't like, and then classify the entire thing as a boondoggle.  What about the ramp reconfiguring at 25th & 28th?  What about the underpass at 73rd?  The connection at 54th?  Your comment that the ramps at Clifton & W. 76th are fine?  Seriously?  I  walked down the 76th tunnel last night and it was a mess.  Dark, damp, crumbling stairs is your idea of fine accessibility?  People who have lived in this area for years and have recently bought in want & deserve more.  Edgewater is one of the city's best assets and should be promoted as such.  Now it's like an afterthought and if people can get down there fine, if not fine.

Surprised to see you're a student in the MUPPD program at CSU.  So am I. 

Yes, the underpasses and tunnels definitely need to be redone, but the point is that they don't provide greater accessibility. If you used to access the park from that access point, then you will access it from the same point when the project is completed. I would have really liked to have seen this project provide more pedestrian access to Edgewater, and frankly it doesn't to the level that it's being hyped as.

The reconfiguration of W 25th/W 28th, is just that, a reconfiguration.

The only real plus from this that I see, is added vehicular access from W 76th. But then again, if you lived in Battery Park, would you really need to drive down to Edgewater?

I would really like to see a better plan unveiled for the shoreway project. I just feel that Cleveland is getting ripped off by a not so great design, that in the end isn't going to benefit a lot of people.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 07:01:05 AM
WestBlvd - you can't just pick & choose the items about the project that you don't like, and then classify the entire thing as a boondoggle.  

Yes you can.  You absolutely can.  If we were to do something less elaborate here, like fix up the tunnels and provide some additional shoreway access, that leaves us (or the state, whomever) with more money for other things.  It's not like we don't have a backlog of projects that need funded.

And I'm beginning to wonder which text at CSU MUPPD says "thrown down some grass and some automotive barriers" to develop a city.  That seems to be the thrust of everything I hear these days.  It's always the same story, slow driving and empty grassland are what makes a city great.  And heavy industry is so yesterday that even going concerns must yield to the interests of vibrant greenspace.  I will say though that some of these ideas sound fantastic for Galveston. 

This here is a northern industrial port, and I'm sorry, but most of our urban development successes are going to involve structures and indoor amenities.  Less like a Mediterranean resort... more like London.  Again, I'm very sorry to point this out.  But there you go.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 10, 2010, 07:10:05 AM
Pedestrian traffic is not just walking.  It's also biking, which cannot currently be done from Lake or 76th, not to mention strollers & wheelchairs.  Only 65th or W. Blvd, the two complete opposite ends of the park.  By improving the two existing tunnels and adding another car access point at 73rd, you've more than doubled the amount of access.

I think you've totally underestimated the impact of the ramp reconfiguring at 25th & 28th.  If you go back and look, the area has a lot of pedestrian traffic (over 400 units of housing in Lakeview Terrace) and is a nightmare to get across.  The Eastbound on ramp from 28th really needs to be removed.  The NW corner of 25th & Detroit will be opened up for development and help make that corner what it should be, a major hub of the city.  I've already heard talk of a hotel being located there.  The sum of all this "reconfiguration" will improve all these aspects.

Did you go to the meeting that was held recently at Mt Carmel to see the presentation and designs?  I think it goes a long way in being creative and using high end materials.  It also makes alot of boring expanses of mowed grass more interesting with landscaping and trees.

The project is not just about access to Edgewater.  Think of it as a facelift for the entire shoreway...  one that does alot of things including improved access to the park, upgraded landscaping, lighting....   better vehicular connections at several points...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 10, 2010, 07:19:01 AM
Yes, this project is just a facelift, but a second rate one compared with earlier plans.

I just feel that Cleveland is being duped with a sort of Bait and Switch scheme. If you look at the original concepts we were given this really cool redesigned shoreway neighborhood. Now a few years later, we're given a watered down version that is no way near as exciting or interesting. Cleveland was given an opportunity to do something really cool and once again the plans fell through and now you get the current plan unveiled a few weeks ago. yawn.

I can't believe people aren't fighting over this crappy design. It seems to be the typical Cleveland mentality, of "hey, there's going to be some investment, it's better to do something than nothing." Why can't we for once do something that is top notch, rather than another ho hum project?

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 8ShadesofGray on March 10, 2010, 07:27:12 AM
I'm not going to wade too deep into this, as the last several pages have hurt my head, but I guess one concern I would have from ODOT's recent project update: "Widen the intersection of Detroit Avenue and West 28th
Street to accommodate the traffic" and "Widen Detroit Avenue between West 28th Street and West
25th Street, and widen West 28th Street to accommodate the new traffic plan" (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/Projectupdate_022310_FINAL.pdf). Unless I'm misreading this, I can't say I'm a huge fan of that. Detroit Avenue is already crazily wide in the area between about W. 28th and W. 32nd. To add more lanes immediately to the east (if that indeed is the plan) would make this section of Detroit look like a half-mile parking lot. If anything, we should be tightening the street here to encourage a more pedestrian-oriented central "gayborhood" around Bounce, Club Cleveland, the Tool Shed, etc. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 07:30:58 AM
Agreed...Detroit is wide enough there as are its sidestreets.  Better for that area to continue as it has.  I'm perplexed.  We could care less about traffic on the shoreway itself, where traffic matters, but let's tear up an acutal neighborhood because we anticipate tons of traffic on the "new" W28th.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on March 10, 2010, 07:35:27 AM
Yes you can.  You absolutely can.  If we were to do something less elaborate here, like fix up the tunnels and provide some additional shoreway access, that leaves us (or the state, whomever) with more money for other things.  It's not like we don't have a backlog of projects that need funded.

I don't know why these tunnels just aren't fixed up now. It's really nothing more than a weekend cub scout project to make them clean and attractive. All you need are a few shovels, some lightbulbs, some brick pavers, some new tile, and a good scrubbing and these tunnels turn from sketchy to attractive in a weekend.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 8ShadesofGray on March 10, 2010, 07:46:05 AM
What concerns me most about Detroit between W 25th and W 28th is that there are already giant swaths of surface lots, but the remaining buildings at least front directly to the sidewalk (with varying degrees of historic exterior detail), and there have been a number of in-fill projects proposed for this area. I don't see how you would be able to expand the road without either cutting severely into both sidewalks or tearing down buildings on one side of the other, both of which seem counterintuitive. Particularly as it seems like there is finally some good development momentum in these couple of blocks.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 10, 2010, 07:58:09 AM
West Blvd - I've got some lightbulbs & shovels, come on down with your cubscouts...    how can you make a statement like that when 2 posts before you were complaining about lack of interesting or exciting designs? 

The intersection at 28th & Detroit will need to be widened to accomodate the truck traffic getting on & off the Shoreway.  The 25th street connection should be narrowed up & made more pedestrian friendly with sidewalks on both sides going into the flats.  The only building slated to be torn down is the Linda's Superette which is not historic or architecturally significant.  The owner is actually very anxious for the project and the demolition.  All this was discussed at the ODOT update meeting.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 10, 2010, 08:06:05 AM
Yes, this project is just a facelift, but a second rate one compared with earlier plans.

I just feel that Cleveland is being duped with a sort of Bait and Switch scheme. If you look at the original concepts we were given this really cool redesigned shoreway neighborhood. Now a few years later, we're given a watered down version that is no way near as exciting or interesting. Cleveland was given an opportunity to do something really cool and once again the plans fell through and now you get the current plan unveiled a few weeks ago. yawn.

I can't believe people aren't fighting over this crappy design. It seems to be the typical Cleveland mentality, of "hey, there's going to be some investment, it's better to do something than nothing." Why can't we for once do something that is top notch, rather than another ho hum project?



Unfortunately in the realm of government spending your analysis holds true.  If we don't spend it, someone else will.  So we might as well beautify while the dollars are still there.  I feel the same way.  The project has lost it's luster.  However, choosing between the watered down version and letting the shoreway crumble as it is now, I'll have a tall glass of water....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 10, 2010, 08:07:16 AM
Forgot to mention--I saw the survey crew out at West Blvd and Clifton again this morning while running around.   I certainly hope construction workers come soon after!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 08:15:49 AM
The only building slated to be torn down is the Linda's Superette which is not historic or architecturally significant.  The owner is actually very anxious for the project and the demolition. 

Speak for yourself... I would be extremely upset if that building came down.  I find it architecturally significant, I'm astounded that anyone wouldn't, and I now hate this plan more than ever.  More destruction of tall dense urbanity in the service of boulevard vibrant greenspace, and more decisions about cars and trucks made by people who hate them.  Why would we want to route truck traffic through the middle of this neighborhood, when currently all those trucks can bypass it?  This is beginning to sound not just ill-advised but insane.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 10, 2010, 10:51:45 AM
Linda's superette is a 2 story convenient store.

Tall dense urbanity it is not.

Did your friends in lakewood tell you about this tall dense urbanity, or do you have first hand knowledge of it? 

I don't have a picture of it but it is clearly labeled and visible in a google maps street view.  Please go look at it and then come back and repeat your statement.

"I find it architecturally significant, I'm astounded that anyone wouldn't, and I now hate this plan more than ever. "

The only thing that marks it as any different than thousands of rinky dink mom and pop convenient stores is that it doesn't have a parking lot fronting the street or a pay phone.

Perhaps you are referring to the Jamestown building next door to the Kitchenette?  a 4 story brick walk up?

I find that building architecturally "interesting" not significant.  It is probably better constructed and more visibly appealing than any new development that will occur around the W. 25th st Detroit intersection but it isn't significant.  And if it was on w 9th you could convert it and sell each floor for north of $250,000  perhaps up to 500,000 if there are 4000 square feet/floor.


Most of the heavy industry isn't on 25th st.  it is either in the flats, on detroit,  over past W.45th st. or south of detroit right around 28th.

Truck traffic will not go through the middle of anything it isn't going through now.

What makes you thing "we" hate cars?  I have one, I drive it every day, I also take the bus and the train, even cabs.  Different modes of transport for different reasons.   Why is wanting to have more options available somehow "hating" cars?  I would prefer that PEOPLE have the top spot over cars.

What makes the most sense for the most people. 

Look they are getting a new I-90 interchange in Avon....when the region is stagnant or losing population, so we can turn more cornfields into McManions and strip malls.

I don't think that is a very smart use of our limited resources BUT BUT BUT....I am not CONSTANTLY beating up those who will benefit from this or calling them or the idea dumb.  It is smart for them.

I live in this neighborhood, as do many posting here, it seems to be a good idea to those who it will affect the most.

WE GET IT...YOU DON'T LIKE IT.  Your point has been made, the horse is dead. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 11:07:02 AM
WE GET IT... YOU DO LIKE IT... AND YOU DON'T LIKE ME.  That horse is dead as well.   

I may "beat up" on an idea or an argument I diagree with, but I make efforts to avoid going after the speaker's character.  I may even lampoon an outlook, and I don't mind having my outlook lampooned... but challenging someone's personal honesty is a different matter.

If you feel I've been too harsh with you, at any time, let me know or let a moderator know.  Please do not consider it an invitation for a personal pissing contest.

FYI I used to park at W26th and Detroit every morning and wait there for a bus downtown.  I wouldn't write so much about this topic if I weren't intimately familiar with the areas involved.  Contrary to your clear implication, I do not come on here to lie to people about what I know, what I believe, or why I believe it.  As stated many times recently... I would appreciate any effort you can muster to deal strictly with the discussion topic and not the character of other forumers.

At the moment we're talking about aspects of this project that were not dealt with last week, or at any point that I know of.  Linda's Superette is no Terminal Tower.  My original post left out the word tall, but I added it in an edit after I compared its 2-story glory with what so often gets built these days.  I don't think it should be leveled so we can put more truck traffic onto a side street in this neighborhood.  It's more than significant enough to not tear it down for that purpose.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 10, 2010, 11:51:41 AM
I don't know you well enough to spend any energy disliking you.

I find your arguments full of holes.

So that dense urbanity you were speaking of was a parking lot?

I have not impugned your character, I have questioned your observations.

You have gone from tearing the project apart in its entirety to now tearing apart each of the components.

Yup, you don't like it...got it. 

You don't like the median, you don't like the speed limit, you don't like the on/off ramps, you don't like the multipurpose path, you don't like the cliff.

Let me preview the future.

you won't like the landscaping, the lighting, the color of the paint on the bridge supports, that it is harder to get into/out of bounce, the contractors.  the whole thing will take too long and cost too much.

You don't like it

You did like it, but your friends in lakewood talked you out of it.

I got all of it...did I miss anything? 

surprise me, tell me something you like about it.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 12:20:35 PM
I used to like the entire concept.  All of it.  Every aspect, as originally presented years ago.  But I hadn't thought it through, nor had I really understood the other side's points at that time.  As with all things, your mileage may vary.

It is absolutely false that "don't like the on/off ramps" because that's the polar opposite of my stated position on that.  Either I was lying when I stated that position, several times so far, or I wasn't.  Make a choice.  As of now you're claiming I said something I didn't say, and you're holding it against me.  For the last time... I support adding access to the shoreway from the neighborhoods.

And I don't understand what I've said to indicate that I "don't like" the cliffs.  That's just goofy.  The cliffs were discussed, but what a curious characterization of the point I tried to make about them.  As far as examining the general idea, and then the specific components... yes, that is how I analyze a project plan.  Guilty as charged.

Go ahead and question my analysis or my view of the facts all day long.  But please scan through your posts for the word "you,"  especially that last one.  The subject of that post is obviously not the shoreway plan.  The shoreway plan is an it, not a you.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on March 10, 2010, 12:43:03 PM
OK, guys, this argument was getting way long in the tooth as it was.  Now you're arguing about the argument.  Nobody really cares to hear it, so take it to PM if you feel you must continue.  Better yet, drop it.  Either way, keep it civil on this thread, and please don't keep going around in circles.  Make your point, then let others have their say.  No bonus for last words.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 10, 2010, 01:13:32 PM
Points made, and thank you X. 

I yield my remaining 11 posts to the floor.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 10, 2010, 01:24:29 PM
Forgot to mention--I saw the survey crew out at West Blvd and Clifton again this morning while running around.   I certainly hope construction workers come soon after!

Ask and ye shall receive.  Well sort off.  The City of Cleveland had some fine employees lazily dropping cold patch into the many cracks and potholes on Clifton after I posted this earlier.  Not the construction crews I had hoped for....but they were amusing to watch!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on March 11, 2010, 05:27:13 AM
Yes, this project is just a facelift, but a second rate one compared with earlier plans.

I just feel that Cleveland is being duped with a sort of Bait and Switch scheme. If you look at the original concepts we were given this really cool redesigned shoreway neighborhood. Now a few years later, we're given a watered down version that is no way near as exciting or interesting. Cleveland was given an opportunity to do something really cool and once again the plans fell through and now you get the current plan unveiled a few weeks ago. yawn.

I can't believe people aren't fighting over this crappy design. It seems to be the typical Cleveland mentality, of "hey, there's going to be some investment, it's better to do something than nothing." Why can't we for once do something that is top notch, rather than another ho hum project?



I also have to sadly agree with this.

Living on Father Caruso at 69th I stand to be one of the prime beneficeries of this project. It will likely make my view more attractive, increase my recreational options and make traffic patterns better for me. But still....I wish it was something more.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 11, 2010, 07:13:58 AM
If I were king of the world I would turn the Battery Park power house into a train station for commuter rail.  coming in from grafton, berea and points southwest (at least it looks like that is where the tracks run, someone please correct me if I am wrong)

and run a streetcar down detroit at least to Rocky river...and possibly to the county line.

And the shoreway would look like clifton with lights and at grade cross streets to get to the park.

I also think we should really consider moving burke to the near east side...between E 55th and the clinic, Between Chester and Carnagie.  It would then sit between our 2 employment axis near rail, near the Euclid corridor, near the highways and OFF the lake.

Is there enough land there?  is there anything monumental that would prevent this?  like perhaps the building heights downtown?  could you solve that by orientating the the runways from the northeast to the southwest like hopkins, instead of E/W like burke?


On the satelite map it looks like their is enough land.  Setting aside the purely political issues involved, like the people living there are not going to want to move.  is there anything else that would prevent this?


That frees up burke for something useful.  another park/marina?  The fact that it is comprised of dredgings and probably toxic limit what kind of building you can do on it, but townhouses like the avenue district might be feasible.   heck think outside the box, how about a nascar track with a professional soccer field on the infield?

Much like detroit we are going to have to deal with the fact that cleveland has under 500,000 in population but must maintain infrastructure of a city of over 1 million.  It doesn't really help to knock down every other house on a street when we still need to maintain the roads, sewers, and electrical to all the areas like all of those houses and people were still there.

We need to figure out ways to consolidate.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on March 11, 2010, 07:45:27 AM
Put an airport in the center of the east side and put townhouses on the dredgings of Burke, where there already is an airport.  For once I'm speechless. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 11, 2010, 07:51:48 AM
Guys... Let's keep this on the shoreway. Gracias.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on March 11, 2010, 08:04:56 AM
For once I'm speechless. 

thank gawd.

How about a little thinking outside of the box and come up with anything constructive instead of just sitting back and ripping everything apart.

Did you miss the part where one sits on the lakefront and the other is a post industrial waste land?  how about we re-purpose what we have.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Avogadro on March 11, 2010, 08:18:41 AM
I for one would not mind having this thread locked down for a few days, or giving the two folks some time to rest.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 11, 2010, 08:27:15 AM
That BP Powerhouse would be a slam dunk for some type of transit stop.  Open a coffee shop/deli on one side where people could wait for the next train or grab a sandwich on your way home.  There are tracks there for light rail.  I followed them east last fall toward downtown, but they disappear right at the Westinghouse curve.  Not sure how far West they go either.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 11, 2010, 01:02:58 PM
That BP Powerhouse would be a slam dunk for some type of transit stop.  Open a coffee shop/deli on one side where people could wait for the next train or grab a sandwich on your way home.  There are tracks there for light rail.  I followed them east last fall toward downtown, but they disappear right at the Westinghouse curve.  Not sure how far West they go either.

Those tracks are still heavily used by freight aren't they?  The ones on the bluff?  I think there are both NS and Conrail trains making their way through there?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on March 11, 2010, 01:16:18 PM


Those tracks are still heavily used by freight aren't they?  The ones on the bluff?  I think there are both NS and Conrail trains making their way through there?

Yup...would need big politics and $$ to transition those tracks into workable passenger rail
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on March 11, 2010, 01:20:36 PM
No, there is a 3rd set of tracks, that were light rail at one time on the South side.  The two other sets are actively used for freight daily.  If  you zoom in on google maps you can actually see them.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on March 11, 2010, 01:26:26 PM
No, there is a 3rd set of tracks, that were light rail at one time on the South side.  The two other sets are actively used for freight daily.  If  you zoom in on google maps you can actually see them.

Did not know that--if they go anywhere that would be great.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 11, 2010, 01:28:21 PM
those tracks die out when you hit the shoreway bridge, and never reappear.

speaking of the west shoreway... ahhh yes, the west shoreway boulevard conversion.  That's the topic :wink:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on March 12, 2010, 10:23:08 AM
Discussion of Burke has been moved here:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,14198.0.html
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on May 11, 2010, 04:04:02 PM
The ODOT project to renovate the tunnels to Edgewater at W. 76th and at Lake in front of Don's Lighthouse is now out for bid.  Contractors bids are due on June 3rd and we should see work starting by the end of July.
 
For anyone interested, plans can be viewed here, https://extranet.dot.state.oh.us/groups/contracts/Lists/ConstructionBiddingDocs/Links.aspx
Project number 100379

I scanned through the prints and the project to renovate these tunnels is much more than I initially anticipated.  Both tunnels are getting alot of work to patch & recoat the walls, floor & ceilings, alot of new lighting, of course the new cut & fill to build the ramps, removing the steps, concrete retaining walls, new landscaping, a good amount of new drainage pipe & structures...  Both tunnels should get a ton of use though when these projects are finished. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 02, 2010, 07:36:52 AM
Bids are due tomorrow for the ODOT Project to renovate both tunnels, W. 76th and Lake Ave/Don's Lighthouse.  Hopefully all goes well and the work can get started right away.

Also received a note that that there is legislation pending with the Ohio Senate to lower the speed limit for the Shoreway.  The legislation is needed in order to proceed with the planned redevelopment of the Shoreway.
 
This matter is extremely urgent.  The legislation must pass by Thursday of this week. 
 
Please contact Senator Tom Patton to urge him to pass the legislation to lower the speed limit for the Shoreway.  Senator Patton's contact information is below. 
 
District 24
Tom Patton (R)
Senator
Senate Building
1 Capitol Square, 1st Floor
Columbus, OH 43215

Phone: (614) 466-8056
Email: SD24@senate.state.oh.us
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 04, 2010, 06:42:58 AM
Bids were received yesterday on the ODOT project to renovate the tunnel at W. 76th & Lake.  Barring any contractual issues, work should begin sometime in August.

The vote on legislation to reduce the speed limit on the Shoreway did not pass.  This is a major setback for the entire project, as design & development work on any of the phases cannot begin until this legislation passes.  The legislation will be reintroduced in the fall and hopefully tacked on to another bill.  Until this passes, no design work will be done for the planned interchange at W. 73rd or the other phases.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on June 04, 2010, 06:53:31 AM
Refresh me... why is a lower speed limit necessary to provide access at W73rd?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on June 04, 2010, 07:16:08 AM
Yeah, I don't understand this.  I would like to see the speed limit lowered as well, but I don't understand why intersections couldn't be added if the speed limit must remain at 50 MPH.  SR 91 through Eastlake is a 50 MPH divided road with plenty of intersections.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: shs96 on June 04, 2010, 07:35:16 AM
^ As are potions of RT 8 in Macedonia.

I did notice the right lane construction work is about done between the race car derby hill and the Whiskey Island exit.  Not sure what they were doing, but glad to have the lane back!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 04, 2010, 07:46:56 AM
Sounds like typical Senator Patton. Get his sugar daddies in the Laborers union, at Minute Man, Commissioner Dimora, Thomas "Tony" George and the rest of the Cleveland underworld to go along with this, and it will pass.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on June 04, 2010, 08:01:56 AM
The West Shoreway is a 50 mph arterial road.  Making it 35 would be nuts.  Ohio needs to clean up its speed limits, get them standardized, and quit using them as a revenue source.  Our Supreme Court just decided that cops can convict you for speeding based on imagination alone.  Northeast Ohio is littered with speedtrap municipalities that are openly used to "keep taxes lower for residents."  This hostile backdoor taxation destroys the business climate here.  It tells people they'd be better off avoiding the area entirely.  It also wastes police resources, thus raising the crime rate, thus once again destroying the business climate.

Many beneficial aspects of this plan still could and should proceed.  But that speed limit change is not the direction we need to go.  Let's compromise... do the good parts of the Shoreway plan, and drop the most controversial.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: tedders55 on June 04, 2010, 10:04:33 AM
The West Shoreway is a 50 mph arterial road.  Making it 35 would be nuts.  Ohio needs to clean up its speed limits, get them standardized, and quit using them as a revenue source.  Our Supreme Court just decided that cops can convict you for speeding based on imagination alone.  Northeast Ohio is littered with speedtrap municipalities that are openly used to "keep taxes lower for residents."  This hostile backdoor taxation destroys the business climate here.  It tells people they'd be better off avoiding the area entirely.  It also wastes police resources, thus raising the crime rate, thus once again destroying the business climate.

Many beneficial aspects of this plan still could and should proceed.  But that speed limit change is not the direction we need to go.  Let's compromise... do the good parts of the Shoreway plan, and drop the most controversial.

Agreed, there are too many useful and much needed aspects of this to let it wither on the vine due to the speed.  the road was designed for 50 MPH and for the most part it appears to be staying that way.  Plus there are plenty of other examples of 45-50 MPH roads with intersections.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 04, 2010, 10:17:09 AM
Yeah, I don't understand this.  I would like to see the speed limit lowered as well, but I don't understand why intersections couldn't be added if the speed limit must remain at 50 MPH.  SR 91 through Eastlake is a 50 MPH divided road with plenty of intersections.

This has been discussed about 50x already.  The current plan does not have at grade crossings.  ODOT has studied it a dozen different ways and there is no way to do at grade crossings on the Shoreway without creating major backups into Lakewood or downtown at peak traffic hours.

Reducing the speed limit to 35 would add about 5 mins of travel time in either direction.  Section of the Shoreway this affects would be from approx Don's Lighthouse to The Harp, which is 2.1 miles.

Basic math: Going 60 mph, this drive takes about 2 mins.  Going 35 mph, the same stretch would take just under 4 mins.

For argument's sake, I drive this about 3 times a day, as I work downtown & come home for lunch.  Rarely can you really go 60 mph on this stretch, traffic doesn't allow it.  So the reality is that the impact on commute times is negligible.

Can everyone please review the latest 62 page ODOT Power Point presentation from Feb 23, 2010 before making uninformed comments on the project?

It's a great presentation, very informative, lots of pretty pictures, easy to understand.  http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Presentations/Pages/default.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Presentations/Pages/default.aspx)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on June 04, 2010, 10:28:08 AM
and as you stated... it has been discussed 50x already.  No need for the 51st.  Moving onward... ;)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 04, 2010, 10:35:32 AM
Refresh me... why is a lower speed limit necessary to provide access at W73rd?

Technically, it's not.  But changing the law to lower the speed limit is the critical first step in creating the boulevard and the planned connections.  If the law is not changed, the funding is not granted to begin the design & development.  No law change = No design work.

Vintage, the developer of Battery Park, worked very hard to get the 76th & Lake tunnel renovations "separated" from the rest of this giant project, so at least they could go forward.  I think they may take the same approach & pursue getting the 73rd connection done.  It's a major uphill battle though.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on June 04, 2010, 10:46:12 AM
Who is preventing anyone from doing design work on new connections to a 50 mph Shoreway?  Why aren't all the plan's aspects "separated" in this sense?  Seems like it would be easier to acquire funding in smaller increments.  And there's no point in forcing people to accept the parts they don't want, like the new speed limit, when there seems to be broad agreement on the rest of the plan.  I think everyone could come out of this fairly happy.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on June 04, 2010, 11:01:12 AM
Not everyone is against lowering the speed limit... and WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION... PAGES OF IT.  Everyone knows who thinks the speed limit is a terrible idea, and who thinks lowering it will have positive effects.  And if you don't know who stands where, then I suggest rereading the thread...

End of speed limit discussion.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 04, 2010, 11:01:15 AM
Who is preventing anyone from doing design work on new connections to a 50 mph Shoreway? 

Good question, perhaps Sen. Patton can answer it for you.  See my earlier post for his contact info.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on June 04, 2010, 11:15:51 AM
After reviewing most of the presentation, I now don't understand even more why this can't move forward if the speed limit must stay at 50 MPH.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on June 04, 2010, 08:08:27 PM
50 MPH = good?  Then let's test that out by changing the speed limit on Clifton and Lake to 50 MPH instead of what it is now. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on June 04, 2010, 10:22:47 PM
50 MPH = good?  Then let's test that out by changing the speed limit on Clifton and Lake to 50 MPH instead of what it is now. 

Here here--and while we're at it I think 50 mph would be reasonable on Chester, Carneigie, Shaker and Fairmount.  Who needs an Opportunity Cooridor when you can BLAST through the Heights at 50 MPH. 

Game on!  ;)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on June 04, 2010, 10:27:57 PM
Who said 50 mph is good?  I'm just saying that the fact that they won't lower the speed limit shouldn't be a roadblock to this project moving forward.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on June 05, 2010, 05:27:12 AM
50 MPH = good?  Then let's test that out by changing the speed limit on Clifton and Lake to 50 MPH instead of what it is now. 

Here here--and while we're at it I think 50 mph would be reasonable on Chester, Carneigie, Shaker and Fairmount.  Who needs an Opportunity Cooridor when you can BLAST through the Heights at 50 MPH. 

Game on!  ;)
Where on Shaker or Fairmount can you drive at 50 MPH or is that sarcasm?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on June 05, 2010, 06:50:18 AM
50 MPH = good?  Then let's test that out by changing the speed limit on Clifton and Lake to 50 MPH instead of what it is now. 

Here here--and while we're at it I think 50 mph would be reasonable on Chester, Carneigie, Shaker and Fairmount.  Who needs an Opportunity Cooridor when you can BLAST through the Heights at 50 MPH. 

Game on!  ;)
Where on Shaker or Fairmount can you drive at 50 MPH or is that sarcasm?

Maybe just a tinge of sarcasm.  ;)

But don't you think 50 MPH on Shaker makes sense?  We could put underpasses on the square with ramps to the outer roads.  Let's not let a few extra minutes of commute time stand in the way of suburban progress....

My point is the 50 MPH argument on the 3 mile stretch of West Shoreway is ridiculous when compared to the bigger picture and what that stretch of road can mean to the near west side, Lakewood and the next 100 years of Cleveland's lakefront development.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on June 05, 2010, 07:25:05 AM
I thought we were moving on... I'd really like to discuss proceeding with the project sans speed reduction...

That 3 mile stretch is a bottleneck leading into downtown for morning rush.  Each mile, more traffic is added.  Slowing traffic down won't do anything for lakefront development.  Every identifiable goal of this project, other than slowing traffic down, is attainable regardless of speed limit.  This bigger picture also supports the result of the legislative vote.

And yes, Chester should be 50.  In many cities it would be.  Urban artieries are often 50 without any form of controlled access.  An argument could be made for Clifton too, though not Lake.  Those aforementioned roads in the Heights are not at all analogous to the West Shoreway, although a lot of roads further east that are 25-35 would be 50 in many cities.  Here, they're speed traps. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 05, 2010, 08:58:20 AM
Slowing traffic down won't do anything for lakefront development. 

your opinion, not fact.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on June 05, 2010, 09:07:43 AM
Slowing traffic down won't do anything for lakefront development. 

your opinion, not fact.

Likewise. 

People don't always agree, and we really have covered all this before.  There's not much to be said on the matter that wouldn't be redundant.  That's why I'd like to focus on moving forward with the ramps and tunnels and stuff. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on June 05, 2010, 09:56:57 AM
Annnnnd done.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on July 06, 2010, 09:34:02 AM
OK, no more controversy, I promise.

Work should start on renovating the tunnels at both 76th & Lake within the month.  Good amount of tree clearing to be done at the 76th tunnel between the tracks & Shoreway to open up the slope for the sweeping grade change switchback that will go about 200' east, then come back west.  Likely have a lane closure on that side of the Shoreway while the work is done to allow the trucks to get on & off the highway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on July 07, 2010, 11:07:59 AM
Great news!


 I 'll try to walk down and take some pics for regular updating in the future.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DeanSheen on July 08, 2010, 09:14:05 AM
This week they are redoing all 4 corner sidewalk interchanges at the corner of Lake and Clifton.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bjk on July 08, 2010, 10:37:43 AM
The corner sidewalk work stretches quite a way west on the Cleveland portion of Clifton Blvd. I'd guess I saw at least six different intersections waiting for the concrete trucks or being worked on this morning.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on July 08, 2010, 12:48:19 PM
The corner sidewalk work stretches quite a way west on the Cleveland portion of Clifton Blvd. I'd guess I saw at least six different intersections waiting for the concrete trucks or being worked on this morning.

Yes must be for solely ADA reasons.  In typical Bureaucrat fashion they will redo these, just to have them torn up again next year (hopefully) as a part of the "Enhance Clifton" streetscape project.  But progress is progress, right? 

Now if they could just bump up the timeframe on the rest of the project to take care of the crumbling sidewalks and rutted boulevard!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on July 08, 2010, 01:42:19 PM



Now if they could just bump up the timeframe on the rest of the project to take care of the crumbling sidewalks and rutted boulevard!

I can't wait for Fr. Caruso to be cut off E/W  with the 73rd tunnel so people stop drag-racing down it.  Give me my nice little pseudo-cul-de-sac ASAP!

((i've personally witnessed 3 near accidents at 69th there with kids on bikes/chasing balls and cars doing prolly 60-ish MPH))
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on July 09, 2010, 06:15:51 AM



Now if they could just bump up the timeframe on the rest of the project to take care of the crumbling sidewalks and rutted boulevard!

I can't wait for Fr. Caruso to be cut off E/W  with the 73rd tunnel so people stop drag-racing down it.  Give me my nice little pseudo-cul-de-sac ASAP!

((i've personally witnessed 3 near accidents at 69th there with kids on bikes/chasing balls and cars doing prolly 60-ish MPH))

Regardless of when that happens, how would you or the residents back in that cul de sac get out to go over to 73rd & get on the Shoreway?  There would have to be some East/West cut over to it and right now there really isn't.  Herman doesn't go all the way over to 73rd from the East?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on July 09, 2010, 07:20:35 AM
Not sure how I missed this, but it's an official update on the project from ODOT describing budgets & timelines dated June 17th 2010:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/6.17.10%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/6.17.10%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on July 09, 2010, 10:36:44 AM



Now if they could just bump up the timeframe on the rest of the project to take care of the crumbling sidewalks and rutted boulevard!

I can't wait for Fr. Caruso to be cut off E/W  with the 73rd tunnel so people stop drag-racing down it.  Give me my nice little pseudo-cul-de-sac ASAP!

((i've personally witnessed 3 near accidents at 69th there with kids on bikes/chasing balls and cars doing prolly 60-ish MPH))

Regardless of when that happens, how would you or the residents back in that cul de sac get out to go over to 73rd & get on the Shoreway?  There would have to be some East/West cut over to it and right now there really isn't.  Herman doesn't go all the way over to 73rd from the East?

I figure it's up to Detroit and back down. Fine with me.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on July 27, 2010, 01:26:23 PM
Looks like the tunnel reconstruction projects at 76th & Lake Ave will start after Labor Day weekend.  Pedestrian traffic needs to be maintained until then. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jmjr on July 28, 2010, 04:47:46 AM
Is there an update posted on the city web site or something? 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 03, 2010, 06:35:41 AM
Work has officially begun on these two tunnels.  Tree clearing equipment is working today at the hillside of 76th between the Shoreway & the RR tracks.  They'll work on the slope till Labor Day weekend, then tunnel will be closed off and major repairs can begin.  Majority of work will be finished this year with landscaping and some finish work done next spring. 

10,000 cy of excavation at the 76th tunnel to cut in the new ramp, while about 3,000 cy of fill at the Lake Ave tunnel to bring that up to grade for that new ramp. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Avogadro on August 04, 2010, 10:15:20 AM
Regarding said tunnels:

Pedestrian tunnels leading to Cleveland's Edgewater Park to close for repairs
Published: Wednesday, August 04, 2010, 11:00 AM
Cliff Pinckard

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The long-awaited project to improve pedestrian tunnels to Edgewater Park is scheduled to begin Friday, when the passageway under the West Shoreway at Lake Avenue is closed until the end of the year.

The West 76th Street pedestrian tunnels under railroad tracks and the West Shoreway will close after Labor Day...

For more: http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/08/pedestrian_tunnels_leading_to.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/08/pedestrian_tunnels_leading_to.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 04, 2010, 11:24:36 AM
Tree clearing at 76th tunnel is pretty much done already.  View from up top in Battery Park and down below along the Shoreway or park area is totally different.   Complete unobstructed views of the lake. 

I printed off plans from the ODOT website for the project and this new access ramp is going to be really really nice when complete.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 04, 2010, 12:33:14 PM
There will be a better article about this in tomorrow's Sun Newspapers. :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 27, 2010, 09:33:31 AM
Tunnel renovations are really moving along.  Demolition is well underway as is the excavation for the new grade at 76th.  Also digging for the retention pond down at Edgewater below.  Retaining walls should start soon.  I have plenty of pictures if anyone is interested.  Also attached are a few basic overview plans from the ODOT prints.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on August 27, 2010, 10:31:24 AM
Tunnel renovations are really moving along.  Demolition is well underway as is the excavation for the new grade at 76th.  Also digging for the retention pond down at Edgewater below.  Retaining walls should start soon.  I have plenty of pictures if anyone is interested.  Also attached are a few basic overview plans from the ODOT prints.

can you post a couple of the pics?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 29, 2010, 07:34:24 PM
Shows the cut for the sloping walkway
(http://a.imageshack.us/img202/5552/024cq.jpg) (http://img202.imageshack.us/i/024cq.jpg/)

Shows the new retention basin down on the beach side
(http://a.imageshack.us/img819/8219/025kls.jpg) (http://img819.imageshack.us/i/025kls.jpg/)

(http://a.imageshack.us/img441/908/026wz.jpg) (http://img441.imageshack.us/i/026wz.jpg/)

Existing tunnel up top on the street level getting demo'd
(http://a.imageshack.us/img825/1250/030kw.jpg) (http://img825.imageshack.us/i/030kw.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Coneybear on August 29, 2010, 09:34:12 PM
Yay! Pics! I'm very excited about this project
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 30, 2010, 06:10:11 AM
The tunnel will remain open yet this week for pedestrian access to the beach, then next Tuesday it closes down completely and the serious demo will occur and I assume the existing steps will be taken out.  That's going to be a big change.

I need to get down to the other tunnel that's part of this project, in front of Don's Lighthouse and take some pictures of the progress over there.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on August 31, 2010, 08:59:54 AM
Great to see this moving forward! 

Not sure if everyone will agree, but I have always felt that if Detroit Shoreway is key to the near West Side.  If it can get going, it will connect Ohio City to the already viable (though slipping) Clifton/Edgewater area and keep things moving forward. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 10, 2010, 02:24:42 PM
Demolition work continues on this project.  I'll have to get some more pictures but the the tunnel is now completely closed to pedestrian access for the rest of the duration and demo has really stepped up.  Forming for new walls should start next week.

At a meeting last week & Councilman Matt Zone said the interchange at W. 73rd under the railroad tracks was a definite go for 2013.  Seems like a long time away but it really isn't.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 27, 2010, 04:32:48 PM
Major progress on the project today, I need to get some updated pictures, but the upper portion of 76th are really coming together, alot of the new wall portions are formed & poured.  Big pour down at the Lake Ave tunnel today as well.  Most notably though, the old center stair section between the tracks and the Shoreway was demo'd out today.  I came by in the morning and they were working on it.  By the afternoon it was rubble.  By next week they should be forming the retaining walls along the sloping grade to 76th...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on April 11, 2011, 12:12:22 PM
Project resumed activity last week.  Crews are busy finishing up the street level of 76th, pouring back interior walls of the upper portion of the tunnel.  Sheet piling delivered along Rt 2 to start driving piles along the railroad tracks for retaining walls.  Still alot of work to do pouring back the section of stairs between the RR tracks and the Shoreway, plus pouring the pavement connector to the multi-use trail in Edgewater from the tunnel below.

Tunnel down by Don's lighthouse is nearly complete except for regrading, landscaping & lighting.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on April 11, 2011, 01:27:53 PM
Thanks for the update!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on April 11, 2011, 02:19:55 PM
Will love to see this project take shape!  With a redone Clifton looming it will really polish up the near west side and help to connect Detroit Shoreway with Edgewater-Clifton.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on April 11, 2011, 02:36:43 PM
I expect to see a solid increase in the number of bicyclists using these tunnels.  In order to bike in Edgewater Park before, you had to enter through 65th tunnel, or West Blvd, or carry your bike up/down the steps of these existing tunnels...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 15, 2011, 06:17:16 AM
NEORSD is out this morning staking the sewer line along the RR tracks from W70th to just past 73rd. Hope its the first step in the process of "move the sewer - dig the tunnel- run W73rd to the Shoreway"  :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on May 23, 2011, 11:02:12 AM
Is Father Caruso Drive being cut off at W. 70th St.?  It seems this will isolate the Italian neighborhood and townhomes on Father Caruso Drive from Battery Park (and the corresponding Edgewater Park/Shoreway car access).  I can't imagine residents of these streets between W. 65th and W. 70th would be too happy about this.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 23, 2011, 11:07:15 AM
Yes. Father Caruso will end at 70th. My understanding is that you will be able to walk over on a walkway South of the RR tracks, but no vehicles.

As a residentat 69th and Fr. Caruso I say "bring it on".  Currently people drive very fast to/from BP area using the long strech of Fr Caruso to haul a**.  I am more than happy to see traffic cut down.  When I do go to Battery Park it is on foot anyway.    And if I *were* to drive, then going up to Detroit and over wouldn't be too onerous.  Yes, it will be a little PITA getting on/off Shoreway, but I find that acceptable.

It's like getting a little cul-de-sac.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on May 23, 2011, 12:40:24 PM
Yeah, I guess that makes sense.  I suppose the Shoreway access via Herman and/or the new W. 54th St. ramps will be nearly as convenient anyway.

That's good they'll have a way to walk over to Batter Park from there though.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on May 23, 2011, 01:04:23 PM
dergon - I'm glad to hear your position on the 73rd interchange and it effectively making your area a cul-de-sac.  I've heard alot of grumblings from others about how they'll be isolated.  I think it's really best of both worlds though. 

One other idea that is being kicked around for the Shoreway development is adding parallel parking along it where it lines Edgewater Park...  logic is that it will give people direct access to the park without having to pull in and drive around to find a space.  And it would slow down traffic.  Theoretically it will give alot more access to the park for big events like July 4th and make it easier to get in/out.  People could park facing westward on the north side and walk into Edgewater or park eastward on the south side then walk to the nearest tunnel...   something to consider
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on May 23, 2011, 01:10:12 PM
Parallel parking on the shoreway?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 23, 2011, 01:20:15 PM
Parallel parking on the shoreway?

The parallel parking is a good idea. It could work, as long as the shoulder is wide enough.

I just spent the last week in San Diego. Much of their beach parking is along 50 mph roads that are a heck of a lot more crowded than the shoreway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on May 23, 2011, 01:38:09 PM
It would be a better idea if it came with a 35 mph speed limit, at grade intersections, sidewalks and some development along the south side of the street.  But at least there's a tunnel you can use to cross under the "boulevard".
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on May 23, 2011, 01:51:14 PM
from everything I know, 35mph is still the plan.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 23, 2011, 02:01:14 PM
It would be a better idea if it came with a 35 mph speed limit, at grade intersections, sidewalks and some development along the south side of the street.  But at least there's a tunnel you can use to cross under the "boulevard".

Agree wholeheartedly!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 23, 2011, 02:10:30 PM
from everything I know, 35mph is still the plan.

Now I'm getting into fuzzy memory zone, so don't quote me ..... but I think that I recall from one of the public forums (summer/fall 2010) a DOT official that the speed limit would stay at 50mph with the new on-ram/off-ramp design. That they hoped sometime in the future, finances dependent, to make the boulevard project full, but that wasn't yet funded so that for the time being people could work under the assumption that ramps at 50mph was as far as it was going to go for now.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on May 23, 2011, 02:22:39 PM
the whacky ramps will still be there, but as far as I know (as of around april) still planning on 35mph.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on May 23, 2011, 02:59:27 PM
35 mph change has not been approved.  I talked to State Sen Tom Patton personally at length about this.  It's going to require an act of congress, literally, to change this because state law doesn't currently allow it.  He is personally not in favor of the change and is not going to support it unless he gets letters of support from the mayors of his constituent cities which will be affected (Lakewood, Rocky River) not likely. 

 - The state has money allocated for maybe half this project (based on 2010 dollar value, not 2015 when it's more likely).  Looking at the timeline for the upgrades on the ODOT website, items are already falling off the schedule (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/Projectupdate_022310_FINAL.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/Projectupdate_022310_FINAL.pdf)), the only thing which is on schedule is the 73rd interchange. 

 - Finally, nothing is going to happen to the main roadbed of the Shoreway until the work on the Innerbelt bridge is complete.  When traffic starts getting impacted from that project, it will be redirected (intentionally or unintentionally) to the Shoreway and ODOT is not going to have the two main arteries into the city from the west side under construction simultaneously, whether the funds are there or not.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: McCleveland on May 23, 2011, 03:05:50 PM
yes, but now due to a technicality, it appears the speed limit can be changed without a legislative act. That was the last I heard, and that was in april.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on May 23, 2011, 03:24:19 PM
I'd be interested to know what that technicality is.  The speed limit change is somewhat controversial.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on May 23, 2011, 06:07:49 PM
The real question will be how will they enforce the speed limit?

I am willing to bet 90% of the traffic will still be going 50-60 mph, regardless of the posted limit.  And tickets for any speed under 55 mph are easy to fight if you're within the 85th percentile speed.  The police officer has to be able to "prove" your speed was unsafe for the conditions (exceeding posted limits under 55 mph are just prima facie evidence that you were driving unsafely in Ohio), which is easy to do on a regular city street.  However, on a limited access highway with 3 lanes in each direction, a wall separating both sides, and no sidewalks, it will be considerably easier to tell a judge that 50 mph was perfectly safe for the conditions.

The real problem is that they need to design the road in such a way that it encourages and/or requires slower travel (narrower, sidewalks, intersections, traffic lights, development along the road, etc.).  Until then, I don't see how they will be able to effectively lower the speed limit that much.  If anything, a 35 mph speed limit would make the road more dangerous.  Studies have shown that a posted speed limit which does not fall in line with the speed a road was designed for causes large variations in the speed of traffic on the road, which is a huge contributor to accidents.  Some people will obey the new speed limit, but many people will still drive 55 mph or more, as they always have, because the road design still permits it.  This would create a bad situation.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on May 23, 2011, 10:45:27 PM
High design speed limit+Low actual speed limit+Traffic cameras=gold mine for the City.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on May 23, 2011, 10:51:41 PM
Or lawsuits galore.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on May 24, 2011, 07:05:11 AM
Remember that people are coming from 90 westbound in a seamless transition.  A sudden drop to 35 would be a mess.  It works where the shoreway becomes Clifton because its readily obvious at that point that the freeway's ending.  Try to do that downtown and people will get killed.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on May 24, 2011, 07:35:51 AM
What studies have been done to show that lowering a speed limit will increase the likelyhood of traffic fatalities?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on May 24, 2011, 07:55:48 AM
Plenty... which is why there are so many mandatory precautions in place wherever you see sudden and drastic speed changes.  Rumble strips, flashing lights, signs that say Danger, etc.  This would be on par with dead man's curve and the 490 dead end, except that instead of being an unfortunate consequence of bad planning it would be fully intentional.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Hootenany on May 24, 2011, 09:54:27 AM
Plenty... which is why there are so many mandatory precautions in place wherever you see sudden and drastic speed changes.  Rumble strips, flashing lights, signs that say Danger, etc.  This would be on par with dead man's curve and the 490 dead end, except that instead of being an unfortunate consequence of bad planning it would be fully intentional.

I agree with you.  Speed limit changes like that don't really work unless there is a physical change in the road conditions and/or scenery.  I initially supported the reduced speed limit based on the fact that the plan included intersections.  Without the intersections the speed limit reduction doesn't make sense to me.  I'd love to see the Shoreway converted to a 35 mph boulevard with intersections, street parking and some development, but the current plan lends itself toward maintaining the 50 mph speed limit.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on May 24, 2011, 11:38:55 AM
If the shoreway were ever converted to a boulevard is it possible that part of Edgewater park could be sold to developers? Gasp. I know it's a debateable topic but the parking lots near the pier would be perfect for a boardwalk with restaurants and residential. You wouldn't necessarily remove greenspace, just convert surface parking lots for development and push parking to the shoreway.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 24, 2011, 12:06:30 PM
If the shoreway were ever converted to a boulevard is it possible that part of Edgewater park could be sold to developers? Gasp. I know it's a debateable topic but the parking lots near the pier would be perfect for a boardwalk with restaurants and residential. You wouldn't necessarily remove greenspace, just convert surface parking lots for development and push parking to the shoreway.

If done the right way, such a development could completely transform Edgewater for the better.

You would have better facilities, more visitors, and more stakeholders to ensure that the beach is kept a clean and safer environment. The state is too far removed from the Park, and it definitely shows. 

It could really be a proud showcase for the city.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 24, 2011, 12:45:46 PM
I think the fact that they've decided to go with ramp instead of intersections  in addition to the bike trail to the South pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of any development there. I'm trying to visualize where there will be enough square footage to put any buildings in that scenario of significant size and just can't do it.....unless you're talking about taking chunks of the current park on the North side.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 24, 2011, 01:36:19 PM
I think the fact that they've decided to go with ramp instead of intersections  in addition to the bike trail to the South pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of any development there. I'm trying to visualize where there will be enough square footage to put any buildings in that scenario of significant size and just can't do it.....unless you're talking about taking chunks of the current park on the North side.

I think any development will have tons of challenges, but I wouldn't write off the possibility. 

I'd suggest redeveloping in the footprint of the current bath facilities. With a surrounding boardwalk. It would take some creativity, but much of that space is currently unattractive and underutilized.  Better use of the surrounding area could be realized with better landscaping and walkways.

Building into the hillside, along the Shoreway is intriguing, however. Given an unlimited budget, I'm sure we could come up with some fantastic ideas. I've been to other Great Lakes cities (St. Joes, MI comes to mind) where similar hillsides were developed to become much more welcoming and pedestrian friendly with terraced walkways, viewing areas, picnic tables, etc.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on May 25, 2011, 08:44:07 AM
One thing to remember about doing anything to the south of the Shoreway is the very active Train Tracks right at the edge of the top of the bluff.   You cant really do anything that will or might undermine the bluff. 

And even if you can terrace it out and have picnic areas...I don't imagine too many folks having a picnic 10, 20, 30 feet from the Freight trains and a similar distance from a highway.  Even if the views are amazing.

The bike path terraced in is probably the best use......Everything could/would be different if the shoreway looked more like lake or Clifton, then you could develop the Flat and push closer to the road/park ...but that is not what is going to happen.



Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 25, 2011, 09:28:34 AM
Sorry I should've been more clear... I meant terracing on the grass in the park, north of the shoreway.





One thing to remember about doing anything to the south of the Shoreway is the very active Train Tracks right at the edge of the top of the bluff.   You cant really do anything that will or might undermine the bluff. 

And even if you can terrace it out and have picnic areas...I don't imagine too many folks having a picnic 10, 20, 30 feet from the Freight trains and a similar distance from a highway.  Even if the views are amazing.

The bike path terraced in is probably the best use......Everything could/would be different if the shoreway looked more like lake or Clifton, then you could develop the Flat and push closer to the road/park ...but that is not what is going to happen.




Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on May 25, 2011, 10:06:28 AM
Do you mean between the upper and lower sections? towards the western end?

Here is the thing, Edgewater is huge and rarely (4th of July) approaches capacity.   It would be very nice and super kewl, but with all our other needs and issues, I just don't see spending that kind of jack to make a place that is perfectly pleasant a 9 instead of a 7 or 8.  especially when we have so many more pressing issues.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on May 25, 2011, 10:22:13 AM
Do you mean between the upper and lower sections? towards the western end?

Here is the thing, Edgewater is huge and rarely (4th of July) approaches capacity.   It would be very nice and super kewl, but with all our other needs and issues, I just don't see spending that kind of jack to make a place that is perfectly pleasant a 9 instead of a 7 or 8.  especially when we have so many more pressing issues.

It's a state park, maybe Kasich will pay for it. :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 25, 2011, 10:24:07 AM
I tend to agree. I also have a hard envisioning the political environment where "selling off one of our most cherished lakefront gems to greedy developers" (as it would be framed by opponents) wouldn't be met with a huge amount of resistance.  Selling unutilized/abandoned/degraded land is one thing,  selling a nice state park is another.


But, then again, it is State property so maybe Kasich would be willing to dump it cheap to give out some tax breaks!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 25, 2011, 11:40:28 AM
Yes, the grass hill right along the shoreway.

This could be undertaken by a private developer, including a residential component, but I would only favor this route under very very strict guidelines which would preserve views and access.

Edgewater has come a long way in the past few years. Yet anyone who has traveled to other coastal cities can clearly see that the Park could be so much more. Just look up some postcards of how it used to look....absolutely beautiful.

This should be the most desirable place in the city, but still I'd guess a vast majority of Clevelander's won't go there. It's underdeveloped imho. And the beach is simply not taken care of like it should be. Now if Metroparks takes over, I think there will be better management and new, more visually appealing infrastructure for the public benefit.

The shoreway project, whether 35 or 55mph, can and should have a dramatic effect on the place. There is a ton of room for improvement.





Do you mean between the upper and lower sections? towards the western end?

Here is the thing, Edgewater is huge and rarely (4th of July) approaches capacity.   It would be very nice and super kewl, but with all our other needs and issues, I just don't see spending that kind of jack to make a place that is perfectly pleasant a 9 instead of a 7 or 8.  especially when we have so many more pressing issues.


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 25, 2011, 11:44:15 AM
I tend to agree. I also have a hard envisioning the political environment where "selling off one of our most cherished lakefront gems to greedy developers" (as it would be framed by opponents) wouldn't be met with a huge amount of resistance.  Selling unutilized/abandoned/degraded land is one thing,  selling a nice state park is another.


But, then again, it is State property so maybe Kasich would be willing to dump it cheap to give out some tax breaks!


Right! It would be quite a challenge politically. But it's obvious the city and state can't afford to treat the place with the attention it deserves. A private component to the Park could bring in much needed revenues.

If developing part of the park were ever on the table, I think the public could be wowed and won over with some pretty pictures.

Kasich in 2016 LOL.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: archangel on May 25, 2011, 12:31:48 PM
I'd support letting the Metroparks administer it, if it would mean the driftwood is cleared once in awhile. Or maybe some sort of volunteer group could handle prettying up the beach.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: theguv on May 25, 2011, 01:33:10 PM
Re: motorized traffic in the greater Battery Park neighborhood (~W78 to ~W65) and the termination of Father Caruso at W73, Councilman Matt Zone informed me that Father Frascati, which currently terminates at W73 will be extended to W70 upon construction of the W73rd underpass.
My greater priority for neighborhood, aka non-motorized, traffic is to create a neighborhood-scale connection, likely following Herman Ave, between W73 and W69 and a separate connection between W76 and W78 following Battery Park Blvd. Both rights-of-way are currently occupied by vacant land and/or parking lots, which should, in theory make development of this neighborhood connector a more easily realized project.
Does anyone on this board have experience developing such projects? If so, your comments would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on May 25, 2011, 02:16:14 PM
Is there a happy medium on the speed limit issue?  Chicago's Lakeshore Drive is 45 mph.  Maybe we can split the difference and go for 40 mph.  Will make the bicyclists, joggers and roller bladers a little less intimidated to use the new roadside paths.  :clap: 

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on May 25, 2011, 02:40:19 PM
^In winter LSD is 40mph, a drop off from the 60mph of the Stevenson freeway
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on May 25, 2011, 04:30:24 PM
One thing to remember about doing anything to the south of the Shoreway is the very active Train Tracks right at the edge of the top of the bluff.   You cant really do anything that will or might undermine the bluff. 

And even if you can terrace it out and have picnic areas...I don't imagine too many folks having a picnic 10, 20, 30 feet from the Freight trains and a similar distance from a highway.  Even if the views are amazing.

The bike path terraced in is probably the best use......Everything could/would be different if the shoreway looked more like lake or Clifton, then you could develop the Flat and push closer to the road/park ...but that is not what is going to happen.



The geography of this area/project really limits what one can feasibly do. Converting this thoroughfare to a boulevard really doesn't allow for much more development to occur outside of an isolated parcel along the 3 mile strip unless we start talking about developing Edgewater Park ... which is obviously a whole other can of worms. I think that the scaled back project achieves the goal that most people wanted, better access to Edgewater Park. We will have new pedestrian tunnels that will connect to the multi purpose trails that already parallel the Shoreway and more street connectivity from the Battery Park neighborhood. Thus, if the route isn't going to a boulevard lined with development, there really is no need to alter the speed limit in my opinion.

Baby Steps. I think eventually in the future the time will be right to fully convert this stretch of road to a boulevard lined with appropriate development.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on May 26, 2011, 08:10:47 AM
^ if the blvd. concept is off the table/postponed, I think an immediate benefit could come from actually widening the west shoreway, giving a large shoulder to encourage parking and more direct access (wooden stairways) to the underutilized grassy hillside of the park.

Sorry I couldn't find a better image, but this is exactly the same scenario in Cardiff, California. Highway 101 is a very busy freeway with rail alongside of it, and inland access to the beaches is cut off. But they have a wide shoulder area for parallel parking. So there is speedy traffic, but also a safe place to share the road. It is a mecca for cycling and running.

(http://www.sccoos.org/cocmp/images/contrib/socal/san_elijo_state_beach_calcoast.JPG)

cardiff
(http://www.aaroads.com/california/images101/us-101_nb_entering_cardiff.jpg)
just up the road
(http://www.aaroads.com/california/images101/us-101_sb_del_mar_13.jpg)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ksonic99 on May 26, 2011, 11:45:00 AM
Except there is no shortage of parking at Edgewater with the lone exception maybe being the 4th of July.

The shoreway has on off ramps directly into the parking lot.  It is not difficult going from driving on the shoreway to parking in edgewater, it is exceedingly easy to do this.

As a matter of fact for almost everybody it is quicker and easier to drive to the shoreway and then park at edgewater than it is to walk or bike there...that is being partially  corrected with the new tunnels and the bike path, but the ease of driving into edgewater is unaffected.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 06, 2011, 07:26:47 AM
Discussion regarding Edgewater Park were moved into a new thread at:
http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,25894.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,25894.0.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 25, 2011, 07:39:42 AM
Update from ODOT announced this past week on the Shoreway says the next phase, 73rd interchange, has been delayed (again) till 2014 start, which means it probably won't finish till 2016.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)

This is a major setback for the residents of Battery Park who've been counting on this interchange for better access, the businesses of Gordon Square, and the residents of the surrounding Edgewater Hill area who've been complaining of cut through traffic.  The side streets of 76th & 74th were not designed to handle all the traffic from Battery Park and this interchange is needed to help handle that. 

According to the update the other access points on the Shoreway are supposed to start in 2014 also, including the reconfiguring of the W25th & 28th interchanges.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 08:50:50 AM
Sometimes I wonder if they are just waiting for us to drift away or die off. 

I have dealt with ODOT as a private developer and when the shoe is on the other foot ODOT has no mercy regarding time delays; ODOT threatened to block off a new roadway to a new area employer of 200+ people if the strict schedule wasn't met.  (Strict schedule is tough to meet when ODOT and/or County civil engineers keep tweaking developers plans and have 30 business days (read: 6 weeks) to do so with their additional comments and with additional tweaks.  Their response usually occurs on the 28th or 29th day.) 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 09:26:46 AM
Most of the time involved with undertaking ODOT projects is dictated by the federal Project Development Process and by the availability of funding. The average time for a transportation project go to from idea to completed is 10 years -- and that is assuming funding is available when ODOT wants it. Lately, funding is not available due to declining gas tax revenues, dramatically increasing costs of petroleum-based construction materials and activities, and compliance with the burdensome regulations that folks like ODOT have to follow.

If you want to make your head spin, click on this link and review the procedures for a highway (or any federally funded transportation project) to go through the Project Development Process....

http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/tdmpdo.asp (http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/tdmpdo.asp)

This page shows only a quick overview, so also click on the links at left under:

NEPA and
Transportation
Decisionmaking
-Purpose and Need
-Alternatives
-Impacts
-Mitigation
-Interagency
Coordination
-Public Involvement

And click on this link:
http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/ (http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/)
To see what often goes into the planning and project development process for a transportation project. Although this is for projects on federal lands, most of these procedures are needed for a project that receives any federal funds and is therefore subject to NEPA.

If you think all of this is burdensome, you're right. Compliance with these laws not only slows projects to a crawl, they also can eat up to one-third of a project's cost.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 09:51:01 AM
Well, they do like to hold meetings don't they.  It is "a good thing" to be certain of a paycheck on Friday.  If they treat a small private developer (who does not have that automatic deposit paycheck.) with the vicious cycle I referred to above, I can just imagine how Byzantine and "create work/look busy" they can get in their own subculture.  Not impressed with the ten year process; would love to follow them around in a the "A Day in the Life Of" style for those ten years.  Of course, if your name is someone like Les Wexner that process is expedited & the budget appears magically.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 10:05:52 AM
They hold meetings because federal law requires public involvement and interagency coordination. And if Wexner provides the funds or tells ODOT to use state funds instead of federal to accelerate the process, which he has, then ODOT doesn't have to tap federal dollars and go through the federal PDP. And you are supposed to be offended by the 10 year timeline, which why I said it.

Everything is about the law, process and funding. They get beat up for their bunker mentality which only creates more laws and process, and eats up more funding to strengthen the bunker.

People get angry when I tell them why things take so long and cost so much. And I tell them this:  ask your Congressman to streamline NEPA.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 10:07:05 AM
Just reviewed the last link:  I suggest on a lot of that purposefully exhaustive list someone learn to use "N/A" (Not Applicable) in filling in the blanks and move on.  During the ten years of meetings did anyone speak up from the back of the room in the case of the Inner belt (This example used for illustrative purposes only, so not off topic.) and ask "By the by, do we have site control (purchase/lease agreement) for the CSX land? 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 10:10:00 AM
Only Congress can change that long list. And it was NS, not CSX, that said ODOT's planned easements weren't as sufficient as they had been in the past.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 10:12:56 AM
Wexner didn't contribute that big an amount or percentage, but ODOT pretty much contributed 100% of that year's capital improvement budget to the Easton interchange.   
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 10:14:27 AM
NS = ?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 10:14:57 AM
Norfolk Southern
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DanB on June 25, 2011, 10:20:25 AM
There is a house on the west side of 69th right at Herman Ave.

Re: motorized traffic in the greater Battery Park neighborhood (~W78 to ~W65) and the termination of Father Caruso at W73, Councilman Matt Zone informed me that Father Frascati, which currently terminates at W73 will be extended to W70 upon construction of the W73rd underpass.
My greater priority for neighborhood, aka non-motorized, traffic is to create a neighborhood-scale connection, likely following Herman Ave, between W73 and W69 and a separate connection between W76 and W78 following Battery Park Blvd. Both rights-of-way are currently occupied by vacant land and/or parking lots, which should, in theory make development of this neighborhood connector a more easily realized project. Does anyone on this board have experience developing such projects? If so, your comments would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 10:32:28 AM
Technical error on the train name in an example is minor, but what is major is the point that an important and expensive issue was on the table after construction start with so much planning involved. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DanB on June 25, 2011, 10:44:33 AM
Is that an off-shoot of the Norfolk and Way Rail Line?  They seem to have a can't do attitude!   :wink2:
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 11:39:23 AM
Technical error on the train name in an example is minor, but what is major is the point that an important and expensive issue was on the table after construction start with so much planning involved. 

You missed what I said. NS changed the rules on ODOT. Why? Because they could.

And, you seem to be a very angry and impatient person who is more interested in venting than understanding. That doesn't mean you have to like it, but in order to change it or avoid it, you have to understand. I am trying to help you understand it. If you want to understand more, let me know. Otherwise I am done with this conversation.


Is that an off-shoot of the Norfolk and Way Rail Line?  They seem to have a can't do attitude!   :wink2:

You lost me on that one.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: DanB on June 25, 2011, 11:41:40 AM
Say it really fast.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 25, 2011, 12:09:09 PM
Cute. Those who work for NS sometimes call it Nazi Southern because they are very strict.

Anyway, back to the topic........
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Jeff5112 on June 25, 2011, 12:17:13 PM
Interesting, I was just going to say something similar to you and that we weren't going to solve anything here.   But, regarding, again, the example:  If you have lots of time to plan and during that period you have (or should have) a written binding agreements with all parties, it should be pretty difficult for one party to "change the rules".  That is if you were minding the store/doing your job.   

By the way, I will not get personal in a discussion like this, but take down your psych shingle regarding me. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: ChiCleveKid on June 25, 2011, 09:55:08 PM
^In winter LSD is 40mph, a drop off from the 60mph of the Stevenson freeway

It's 40 all year in some stretches... But anyone that actually drives 40 mph on LSD is probably on said substance.

I drive twice a week on it from its start at Hollywood to I-55 and get passed - going 60 - regularly.
To be fair, the cpd is constantly out ticketing.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 26, 2011, 08:23:22 AM

By the way, I will not get personal in a discussion like this, but take down your psych shingle regarding me. 

Except you just got personal. :) I am what I am and this is what I do. So if you don't like it, stay away from me.

So...... Please get back on topic!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on June 26, 2011, 09:01:40 AM
Whatever happened to the pedestrian tunnels? Last year they installed these really nice white lampposts at the tunnel just past the Clifton/Lake entrance and it looked like all the pavement was set and all that was needed was a little grass landscaping. It now appears that the lampposts have been removed recently and I've seen little if any work on this tunnel for most the spring.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 26, 2011, 11:38:29 AM
Pedestrian tunnels are still in progress, you can walk through the one at Dons Lightouse.  They installed the wrong light poles and have install a different style.

They still have some finish grading and landscaping to do.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on June 26, 2011, 11:51:58 AM
^
Odd. Those lampposts were installed last fall, I swear they just took them down in the past week or two, perhaps Restoration Hardware has a 270 day return policy. They were really nice looking lampposts too, it'll be interesting to see what the "correct" ones look like.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on June 26, 2011, 05:49:28 PM
Update from ODOT announced this past week on the Shoreway says the next phase, 73rd interchange, has been delayed (again) till 2014 start, which means it probably won't finish till 2016.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)

This is a major setback for the residents of Battery Park who've been counting on this interchange for better access, the businesses of Gordon Square, and the residents of the surrounding Edgewater Hill area who've been complaining of cut through traffic.  The side streets of 76th & 74th were not designed to handle all the traffic from Battery Park and this interchange is needed to help handle that. 

According to the update the other access points on the Shoreway are supposed to start in 2014 also, including the reconfiguring of the W25th & 28th interchanges.

F*ck.  :(

I find this most displeasing.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on June 26, 2011, 07:27:25 PM
Update from ODOT announced this past week on the Shoreway says the next phase, 73rd interchange, has been delayed (again) till 2014 start, which means it probably won't finish till 2016.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)

This is a major setback for the residents of Battery Park who've been counting on this interchange for better access, the businesses of Gordon Square, and the residents of the surrounding Edgewater Hill area who've been complaining of cut through traffic.  The side streets of 76th & 74th were not designed to handle all the traffic from Battery Park and this interchange is needed to help handle that. 

According to the update the other access points on the Shoreway are supposed to start in 2014 also, including the reconfiguring of the W25th & 28th interchanges.

F*ck.  :(

I find this most displeasing.

Where is our representation?   Why does it seem like Cleveland and NEOhio always get the shaft on these projects? 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on June 26, 2011, 08:12:06 PM
Transportation projects are being scaled back not only statewide, but nationwide....

http://www.kmbc.com/r/27704440/detail.html (http://www.kmbc.com/r/27704440/detail.html)
http://www.drivemi.org/Articles/tabid/68/ID/11932/Lawmakers-introduce-fix-for-Michigans-transportation-funding-crisis.aspx (http://www.drivemi.org/Articles/tabid/68/ID/11932/Lawmakers-introduce-fix-for-Michigans-transportation-funding-crisis.aspx)
http://nycapitolnews.com/2011/06/new-york%E2%80%99s-transportation-crisis/ (http://nycapitolnews.com/2011/06/new-york%E2%80%99s-transportation-crisis/)
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10315/1102464-147.stm (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10315/1102464-147.stm)
http://t4america.org/resources/transitfundingcrisis/ (http://t4america.org/resources/transitfundingcrisis/)
http://www.tdtnews.com/story/2011/01/05/71488/ (http://www.tdtnews.com/story/2011/01/05/71488/)

Those are mostly Midwest-based transportation news/blog items. Projects are being scaled back until new revenues are identified to replace the dying gas tax and reconstruction of the aging Interstate system which is nearing the end of its structural lifespan. And, of course, no elected representative who seeks re-election wants to raise new revenues, as evidenced by the renewable six-year transportation funding law that had expired two years ago.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on June 27, 2011, 01:47:29 PM
Response I received today from ODOT after emailing them my concerns about the continued delay of the project...

Mr. Xyz:

Thank you for contacting the Ohio Department of Transportation with your questions about the status of the planned connection of West 73rd street and reconfiguration of the interchange.  We understand your frustration in regard to this project not getting under way as quickly as originally anticipated.  This project continues to be a priority for ODOT, but we have encountered many obstacles along the way which have impeded us from moving forward as fast as originally projected.

We are currently in the design phase for this large project.  We are actively coordinating with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and Norfolk Southern Railroad Corporation to address their complexities and concerns.  We are also currently working with the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District to plan a massive sewer re-location effort which is critical to the project and highly complex in dealing with the size, hydraulics, obtaining right-of-way and complying with environmental regulations.   

We ask that you express to the members of your neighborhood that we fully understand the importance of this project to the residents and business owners in your community and we are working as quickly as possible to overcome many obstacles to ensure that this project is done correctly.  We appreciate your patience during this important part of the design process.

Jackie Schafer, Public Information Officer
Ohio Department of Transportation
District 12: Serving Cuyahoga, Lake & Geauga Counties
Ph: 216.584.2006
jaclyn.schafer@dot.state.oh.us


As much as I appreciate the timely response, the issues regarding the sewer relocation and railroad coordination are not new.  I'm starting to see how ODOT works, and no real in depth thought has been given to this project at all until now, and they JUST realized the extent of some of these issues.  ODOT may in fact be ready to move forward with the project, but the other players likely are not, including the EPA, NS, and NEORSD.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jborger on June 27, 2011, 03:44:33 PM
Update from ODOT announced this past week on the Shoreway says the next phase, 73rd interchange, has been delayed (again) till 2014 start, which means it probably won't finish till 2016.

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)

This is a major setback for the residents of Battery Park who've been counting on this interchange for better access, the businesses of Gordon Square, and the residents of the surrounding Edgewater Hill area who've been complaining of cut through traffic.  The side streets of 76th & 74th were not designed to handle all the traffic from Battery Park and this interchange is needed to help handle that. 

According to the update the other access points on the Shoreway are supposed to start in 2014 also, including the reconfiguring of the W25th & 28th interchanges.

ODOT and bad news often go hand in hand.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on July 13, 2011, 04:07:25 PM
With the innerbelt lane closures pretty much going into full swing over the past few days, it's no surprise that they delayed this project a few more years. I figured a lot of I-90 traffic would get funneled to the West Shoreway, but didn't expect the heavy volume I've been seeing the past few days. It feels like there are twice as many cars compared to the week before. Clifton and Lake Avenues were a parking lot at rush hour both today and yesterday. I'm not sure how much of a factor this was in delaying the project, but it would be a nightmare to have both of these arteries into downtown under construction at the same time.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on July 13, 2011, 05:41:14 PM
it absolutely was a factor.  Along with funding.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 09, 2011, 01:55:37 PM
Some updates on the tunnels
 - Lake Avenue tunnel is pretty much done.  Just need to reinstall the lightpoles and finish the landscaping, come October, per ODOT guidelines.
 - 76th tunnel has a long way to go.  Completion was extended to this year based on poor soil conditions which led to the driven sheet pile.  Still having issues with the soil nails and design of the retaining walls along the RR tracks.  Otherwise, work up top on 76th is wrapping up.  Pavers are installed.  Lights & landscaping in October.  Concrete walls will be coated.  Public art is in the planning phase.  Lower level connection at Edgewater is nearly complete.  Ramp is paved, bioswale pond is done with fencing, landscaping and painting still remain.

Big picture for the Shoreway - mainline reconstruction is still a ways off, 2015 I think.  Right in/right out at W. 54th is probably getting scrapped which will save money for the project and the local residents/businesses don't want it anyhow.  Bicycle lane in two directions may be located on north side of the westbound lane, with some type of buffer/median installed between that & vehicle traffic. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jjames0408 on August 09, 2011, 09:17:13 PM
It will be so nice to see all of those completed and will help future development. Currently it's so difficult getting to Edgewater from those neighborhoods.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bjk on August 10, 2011, 11:46:49 AM
  Otherwise, work up top on 76th is wrapping up. ....... Public art is in the planning phase.  Lower level connection at Edgewater is nearly complete. 

So I guess the guy with the can of spray paint wasn't part of the planning, then?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jborger on August 10, 2011, 12:11:24 PM
It will be so nice to see all of those completed and will help future development. Currently it's so difficult getting to Edgewater from those neighborhoods.

I think it's not enough to have any type of noticeable impact.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 24, 2011, 06:24:04 AM
More bad news for the Shoreway project....   major cost overruns, questions about funding and the project gets whittled away more and more...

Cleveland officials propose cost cuts for West Shoreway project, slam ODOT for delays

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/08/cleveland_officials_propose_co.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/08/cleveland_officials_propose_co.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: weepinwillow on August 24, 2011, 08:53:01 AM
assuming ODOT gets it's proverbial $#!t together, how do you think this development will effect edgewater? Will it make the area more attractive or will it cut off access enough to make it less attractive? I'm hoping it makes the area more walkable. It's too bad they didn't go ahead with the Euclid Corridor bus treatments to Clifton.. thoughts? (is it obvious that I'm looking at a property over here?)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanforever on August 24, 2011, 09:30:09 AM
Would four intersections on the shoreway really be unacceptable for traffic? 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 24, 2011, 10:00:12 AM
where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on August 24, 2011, 10:16:30 AM
^I would love to see what assumptions were used in that model.  How much traffic in the real world would choose to travel down Detroit, Lorain or any parallel street to the new boulevard?  How many people would choose I-90?

ODOT has a history of finding excuses, rarely do they find solutions, especially if it requires innovation.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on August 24, 2011, 12:32:18 PM
I don't believe those studies either.  ODOT isn't in the business of using less concrete.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 24, 2011, 12:51:49 PM
so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

It's a moot point, the latest iteration doesn't include any intersections and they still don't have enough money...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on August 24, 2011, 01:43:17 PM
so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

It's a moot point, the latest iteration doesn't include any intersections and they still don't have enough money...
i don't think ODOT has ever released the actual traffic studies or their assumptions, but has remained firm that it will degrade service to cars, and won't work. 

commuters and commute times are certainly an important element to consider, but i think a balance needs to exist.  does it make sense to (re)build a roadway to serve 10 hours of peak traffic per week (out of 168 hours in a week)?  in some cases it may, and maybe there are really 20 hours of peak traffic per week.  i can't help but think that this whole process is like designing the huge parking lots for a big box store that sit 3/4 empty most of the time, except for 2 or 3 big shopping days.

if this project isn't going to be significantly different than the current configuration, i'm not sure it makes sense to spend any money at all on it.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 24, 2011, 01:55:04 PM
I don't like any of this news.

But for me, the "W73rd under the RR with connection to the Shoreway" is the most important piece for development.  This is the crucial part for Det-Shor and Gordon Square health and development.

Yes I want the lakefront access and the beautification and also would ideally want to see the originally proposed 4 intersection bouleveard, but I guess I'll have wait (perhaps a long long time) for that. :(
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on August 24, 2011, 02:16:43 PM
where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.

I'd like to see these studies.  Clifton doesn't back up and most of the traffic on the Shoreway comes straight off of Clifton (and some off Lake).  Also, I would bet that Carnegie and Chester each have as much traffic on the east side and aren't too bad at rush hour.

Sure, it may add a couple minutes.  But I think the benefits outweigh the slight cost of adding 2 minutes to someone's commute.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanforever on August 24, 2011, 02:35:10 PM
where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.

I'd like to see these studies.  Clifton doesn't back up and most of the traffic on the Shoreway comes straight off of Clifton (and some off Lake).  Also, I would bet that Carnegie and Chester each have as much traffic on the east side and aren't too bad at rush hour.

Sure, it may add a couple minutes.  But I think the benefits outweigh the slight cost of adding 2 minutes to someone's commute.
Very true and Clifton would have about the same amount of traffic lights proportionally.  I think if ODOT really wanted to consider all the options that could have played around with modeling with 2 or 3 intersections.  But they simply said no after they believed 4 intersections would not work.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on August 24, 2011, 03:05:29 PM
Because ODOT doesn't like sidewalks :)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on August 24, 2011, 10:46:37 PM
so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level.  Also, let's not forget that the majority of traffic on the Shoreway becomes traffic on Clifton, which doesn't have any substantial problems.  Why are at grade intersections OK to the west of Lake, but not to the East?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on August 24, 2011, 11:40:46 PM
so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level.  Also, let's not forget that the majority of traffic on the Shoreway becomes traffic on Clifton, which doesn't have any substantial problems.  Why are at grade intersections OK to the west of Lake, but not to the East?

This is a big part of the argument against this that I don't understand.  If ODOT properly plans for and installs timed lights, etc, the effect on commuters on this last 2 miles would be minimal.   I really hope our leaders show some guts and fight ODOT for every penny on this project.  This project stands to help finally do what most urban developers in Cleveland have not been able to do:  tie multiple neighborhoods together at once and give them all a fighting chance.   Without it, Detroit Shoreway will remain isolated from Clifton/Baltic, Edgewater, etc.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 25, 2011, 06:22:09 AM
This is a big part of the argument against this that I don't understand.  If ODOT properly plans for and installs timed lights, etc, the effect on commuters on this last 2 miles would be minimal. 

Minimal?  There are no intersections as currently planned and just the mere reduction in speed limit has West Side commuters up in arms.  Be careful about making assumptions as to what effects others would consider "minimal".

Traffic interruptions aside, it's now a cost issue.  There isn't enough money to reconfigure the 25th/28th intersection which was the most important from a safety standpoint, there certainly won't be enough to reconfigure any others.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 25, 2011, 06:44:05 AM

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level. 


Sometimes. Often, however, reducing lane-miles (how roadway pavement is measured) results in a reduction of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT, how traffic is measured). Elsewhere in the nation, whenever a highway was proposed to be downgraded to an arterial or completely removed, motorists feared a "carmageddon." But just as more lane-miles cause the phenomenon of "induced demand" with people driving farther or more often, so does the inverse. People drive less, use transit, telecommute, take transit or drive on alternative routes if available, or relocate their work or housing when roadway capacity is reduced. But in the absence of those alternatives, the economy could similarly be downgraded.

Ultimately, this project reveals the importance of distinguishing between accessibility and mobility. ODOT's priority has long been mobility -- of vehicles (understandably, since more VMTs means more revenue for them to play with). The city's priority seems to be giving its citizens accessibility to goods and services (understandably, if they want to get re-elected). How this project emerges from this debate will signal an important direction for the future of other, similar decisions for this city (the Inner Belt being a cause lost to ODOT and the old way of viewing transportation investments -- moving more vehicles rather than what's in them).

This report discusses the importance of that distinction, and how a local or regional economy can actually be enhanced better over the longer-term by emphasizing accessibility over mobility....

http://www.vtpi.org/vmt_red.pdf (http://www.vtpi.org/vmt_red.pdf)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 07:15:33 AM
How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: bjk on August 25, 2011, 07:49:25 AM
A problem with the side streets today was the number of trees and tree limbs down in Ohio City.

Franklin was closed near W 65, there were limbs and wires down on 65th, and even on Lorain (I went pretty far south to try to avoid the traffic problems) there were limbs down.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 08:34:57 AM
What has puzzled me most about this project is the need to remove a lane for a multi-purpose path, especially between West 65th and West Blvd. I walk on the multi purpose path that already exists just 20 yards north of the shoreway everyday. I just can't figure out why we'd need another a few feet away, and along a busy road no less! Why can't we just fix up the one we already have instead of building another right next to it?!? It just seems so silly to argue for more paths in an area that has plenty. Once the pedestrian tunnels are complete, this area will have great pedestrian accessibility.

This project has taken so many directions over the past few years. What is the ultimate goal that is wanted now?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on August 25, 2011, 11:56:17 AM
How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.

Not really, no.  Nobody is even considering removing the Shoreway and replacing it with nothing without telling anyone in advance.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on August 25, 2011, 01:12:50 PM
How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.

Not really, no.  Nobody is even considering removing the Shoreway and replacing it with nothing without telling anyone in advance.

Unless he means that the worst case scenario is that the Shoreway will include intersections fitted with red lights that never turn green.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on August 25, 2011, 01:25:12 PM
Or that usually are always green, but occasionally they're red all night. And nobody ever knows in advance.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jam40jeff on August 25, 2011, 01:48:28 PM
(http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/8/6/128940250813601716.jpg)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 01:49:04 PM
Yes, this morning was a worst case scenario for alternate shoreway routes, sorry if that wasn't clear. As far as the extra time it takes for commuters to get home, well isn't that already a moot point now? You generally have to wait 3+ cycles at the shoreway exit and Lake now that that I-90 traffic uses it as a short cut, big deal, so it adds 5 minutes at rush hour. I just see this boulevard conversion as money better suited elsewhere in the city. Instead of building another pedestrian path next to existing paths, why not just make Edgewater Park a more pleasant place. Develop the lakeshore instead of a road kind of near it.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 25, 2011, 02:54:31 PM
You can't use this money for anything other than for transportation. And if any state gas tax money is involved, it cannot be used for anything other than roads, as per the Ohio Constitution, Article XII Sec. 5a.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 04:39:01 PM
In terms of a roadway, there's nothing terribly wrong with it. Look at MLK on the east side ... that road is terribly beat up along with the pedestrian paths alongside it, but yet in Cleveland, let's put millions of dollars into infrastructure that is sound, but let crumbling roads crumble more? Seems wasteful to me.

I think in the end, with whatever is ultimately chosen, it's not going to be what anyone really wanted. You can convert it into a "boulevard" but in the eyes of cars and pedestrians who use it, it will always be a highway. A conversion to a boulevard doesn't just magically make it a boulevard. It will always lack the scale of development that makes a boulevard a boulevard. Many of our current highways have landscaped medians that the Shoreway currently lacks. These are by no means boulevards and adding a sidewalk and putting up a 35 mph sign would not make it so. Yet, many think the simple act of adding a pedestrian path and putting some landscaping will magically make this feel like a boulevard. As a resident, I know that regardless of what speed the traffic flows on this new construction, I do not want to walk alongside this highway boulevard. I love walking down Clifton because there are things to look at ... gorgeous homes of varying architecture, shops, and dining. What will this new boulevard have for me to look at? It's going to feel cold, isolated and disconnected from the lake. When I use the pedestrian paths  that go through the wooded section of Edgewater and then alongside the beach, I look up at the Shoreway and think, "Are people really fighting to put millions of dollars into that?" I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.






Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on August 25, 2011, 05:02:24 PM
^ If you've ever seen Lincoln Memorial Drive in Milwaukee, I think it could be a really great template for the Shoreway.

Believe me, it is far and away a much better experience than the Shoreway.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/#)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on August 25, 2011, 05:03:02 PM
The project was an outgrowth of the city's Lakefront Redevelopment Plan. The goal when this project was first conceived was to turn the Shoreway into a boulevard that was less of a barrier between the city and the lakefront, and along which development could grow. Details of that vision are still available here:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html)

Aw heck, I'll just post a portion of the graphic which shows the West Shoreway and what this project was originally intended to enable.......

(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Urban%20planning/waterfront-edgewater-s.jpg)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 05:22:44 PM
^ If you've ever seen Lincoln Memorial Drive in Milwaukee, I think it could be a really great template for the Shoreway.

Believe me, it is far and away a much better experience than the Shoreway.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/# (http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/#)


I like how the path beside it is at a slightly lower elevation than the street level. I think this will need to be done for the Shoreway to at least get pedestrians to use it.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on August 25, 2011, 05:35:59 PM
The project was an outgrowth of the city's Lakefront Redevelopment Plan. The goal when this project was first conceived was to turn the Shoreway into a boulevard that was less of a barrier between the city and the lakefront, and along which development could grow. Details of that vision are still available here:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html)

Aw heck, I'll just post a portion of the graphic which shows the West Shoreway and what this project was originally intended to enable.......

(http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Urban%20planning/waterfront-edgewater-s.jpg)

Does the current proposal even lend to the future possibility of development along the new boulevard? For example, in that graphic, it shows the potential for buildings on the south side of the Shoreway just before it curves inbound under the railroad tracks. I'm not sure who is in possession of this parcel or if it's city/state owned, but could driveways be put in even if the final conversion is intersection free?

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on August 25, 2011, 08:33:48 PM
Good question WestBLVD. Instead of being an additional barrier, new development can do a world of good to enhance connectivity if done the right way. 

It's not too hard to envision new buildings that could span the tracks by Edgewater. Or how something like the legendary North Coast Transportation Center could bridge the gulf between downtown and the lake.

I thought the genius of the Blvd. conversion would be to finally take into account the the untapped value of the land on each side of the road. Jersey barriers be damned.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on August 26, 2011, 06:34:21 AM
I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on August 26, 2011, 07:30:26 AM
I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.


Are you correct about the sales at Battery Park??  It's not fully built out as is being built in segments/phases.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: biker16 on August 26, 2011, 03:11:54 PM
Quote
We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

Battery park is NOT lakefront property.

How do you get from battery park to the lake? 

The Market for real Estate has been distorted by the Economic situation.   just because it isn't selling now does not mean it will not sell when the economy improves. 

The Idea was to create valuable lakefront land that Cleveland Lacks adding residential addresses to the shoreway would have long-term benefits to the park and to the entire neighborhood.  As an urban park Edgewater is an embarrassment. why is there soo much parking, why isn't there a playground, why doesn't it have any activities there, like tennis, squash, or basketball, and why is the beach so Filthy?   

There is a lack of money needed to maintain and grow the park.  lets say We could add residential development to the boulevard, how hard would it be to propose a SID for battery park, Edgewater Neighborhood and any new development  on the boulevard, to fund the upkeep and improvements needed at Edgewater park.   It would be possible to use the revenue from the assessment to support the park.
 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: archangel on August 26, 2011, 03:28:21 PM
I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.


I'm fairly sure Battery Park is doing very well in terms of selling built units. It isn't entirely built, but what is built is mostly sold.

I agree completely about the exchange at 25th/28th. It SUCKS. Needs a total rework.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 23, 2011, 09:36:39 AM
Latest version of West Shoreway project missing trails to the north; bicycling advocates unhappy
Published: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 6:00 PM     Updated: Friday, September 23, 2011, 7:25 AM
  By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A key motive of efforts to turn the West Shoreway into a friendly boulevard are biking and walking -- plans called for trails to roll nearby the 2 1/2-mile route.

But large swaths of the trails are lost in the city's latest, pared-down version of the project. And bicycling advocates aren't happy.

"We saw it as major progress for cyclists to travel safely and easily," says Kevin Cronin of the nonprofit Cleveland Bikes. "It will be a lost opportunity if that goes away."

Frustrated City Hall officials have, for now, jettisoned most of the trails, as they grapple with skyrocketing costs.

READ MORE AT:
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/09/latest_version_of_west_shorewa.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/09/latest_version_of_west_shorewa.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on September 23, 2011, 06:28:08 PM
I vote to cancel.  It is so far removed from a project that would extend the city grid to the lake, that its just not worth it
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on September 23, 2011, 06:37:35 PM
Fully agree.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on September 23, 2011, 07:51:50 PM
I agree also.  Let's spend more to reconstruct sound walls for ODOT.   That is an investment in Cleveland's future....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: X on September 24, 2011, 12:54:13 AM
Put me in for a cancel vote, too.  This is a good example of how a great ideas are pared down to the point that it isn't worth pursuing them.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on September 24, 2011, 09:50:10 AM
I agree also.  Let's spend more to reconstruct sound walls for ODOT.   That is an investment in Cleveland's future....


Cleburger, I was a big supporter of the original plan, then a mild supporter of the stripped down plan.  This plan, in my opinion, should be shelved until the funding for something closer to the original vision is secured.  If we go ahead now with a few cosmetic changes, we will lose an opportunity to dramatically improve a growing and prosperous section of the city for a generation.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on September 24, 2011, 10:41:02 AM
so the loss of bike paths is the deal breaker for you who would no longer support?  You'd forego the 73rd interchange, the reconfigured 25th/28th interchange and all the other improvements that the stripped down plan still includes???
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: archangel on September 24, 2011, 02:49:11 PM
So the plan means the bike paths absolutely cannot be added later?

I'd really like those new interchanges, especially at 25th/28th.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: punch on September 24, 2011, 03:25:12 PM
I am for it being a boulevard with at grade intersection and no off ramps, with the land surrounding the new street being opened up for development and recreational space.  In other words, the original plan.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on September 27, 2011, 06:24:26 AM
I am for it being a boulevard with at grade intersection and no off ramps, with the land surrounding the new street being opened up for development and recreational space.  In other words, the original plan.
Amen punchin Pat.  Amen!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on September 27, 2011, 06:25:20 AM
BTW, and slightly off topic, saw a survey team working Clifton over near W 115th a few days ago.   Anyone know what this might be now?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 27, 2011, 12:42:24 PM
Probably related to this thread: ;)
http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on September 27, 2011, 01:51:20 PM
Probably related to this thread: ;)
http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html)

I thought the BRT and/or median project was officially dead?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on September 27, 2011, 07:08:13 PM
No, it's not dead. ODOT chose not to fund it in the 2011 TRAC recommendations. But RTA and the City of Cleveland are still very interested in it.

Consider it like one of many home improvements you want to make, but you couldn't get a home equity loan large enough to cover all the improvements. It doesn't mean you'll never make all of the improvements. You just won't be able to make them right now, or as you had originally to make them.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: freethink on September 27, 2011, 09:48:36 PM
OK I'll take the latest version. I am not ready to turn down an 85 mill dollar project that we are not paying for. Besides the road will need to be replaced sooner than later. We are talking about a new road, new exchanges, improved access, new landscaped areas plus all of the badly needed cosmetic changes that come with a project like this. The attitude so often here is that if we don't get our way then we don't want it. But that's not how it works, things will  be negotiated, needs will be discussed. And just to remind everyone, there is no extra monies anywhere. Plus as time goes by the price will continue to rise. Even as it is presented now it will greatly improve the area. The bike path issue was worked out with the innerbelt project, I see the same result here.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 18, 2011, 02:48:16 PM
A public meeting will be held Thurs Dec 1st at Fulton Community Church, 1688 Fulton Road, 6-8 pm.

Project update & community dialogue on transforming the West Shoreway into a landscaped lakefront boulevard.

On another note, progress this week on landscaping, railings and other finishing touches on the tunnel projects at Lake & 76th.  Still need to complete the work at 76th between the RR tracks & the Shoreway, but the upper section in Battery Park and the lower section in Edgewater are pretty well done.  Maybe I'll get some photos up this weekend.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on November 18, 2011, 04:07:33 PM
Darnit I'm going to be out of town.   I hope someone can post some minutes of this meeting!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on November 19, 2011, 08:55:21 AM
Please be encouraged to fight the good fight in the comments sections...

Bait and switch: Ohio transportation officials need to stop putting up roadblocks as Cleveland tries to transform the Shoreway and its lakefront: editorial
Published: Saturday, November 19, 2011, 9:40 AM
The Plain Dealer Editorial Board By The Plain Dealer Editorial Board


ODOT officials have moved the goal posts so often that Clevelanders from Mayor Frank Jackson on down have every right to feel disrespected and to wonder what it will take to complete a project that promises to revamp the city's relationship with its lakefront.

Most recently, after Cleveland city planners attempted to trim costs by shaving the once-ambitious plans yet again, ODOT informed them that the price tag had unexpectedly gone up again -- almost doubling since their last estimate. So at the suggestion of top ODOT officials, the Jackson administration applied for another $28 million through the department's review process for identifying priority projects -- and promised to come up with an extra $7 million from the city's limited capital funds. But when ODOT scored the city's request, it was near the bottom of 72 proposals.

ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.


The ODOT committee that makes funding decisions meets Dec. 15. Its members need to take a long, hard look at both the commitments they have already made and at the staff's latest, skewed analysis of the Shoreway project.

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html (http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on November 19, 2011, 09:07:36 AM
Quote
ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.

Because ODOT doesn't count economic impacts in dollar amounts, but in traffic counts. The first economic impact study ODOT ever did for a highway project was in 2005 for the Inner Belt, but only after pressured into it by the community. And it was a bush-league economic impact study that didn't understand the concept of net economic impact on a regional scale. ODOT believes that any project which moves more vehicles faster IS economic development, and damned any walking, bike-loving, city-inhabiting anti-American commie who says otherwise!
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 19, 2011, 09:23:52 AM
On a side note, I went down to Edgewater this morning to take pictures of the lower tunnel entrances at Lake & 76th.  The park is such a mess, I had to struggle to find a shot that didn't have overgrown weeds, dead branches lying around, or graffiti.  What a shameful mess.  Trees & branches that blew down from the storm in August still lay around, fences are rusted apart & falling down, the shelter houses look a mess. 
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on November 19, 2011, 09:32:41 AM
On a side note, I went down to Edgewater this morning to take pictures of the lower tunnel entrances at Lake & 76th.  The park is such a mess, I had to struggle to find a shot that didn't have overgrown weeds, dead branches lying around, or graffiti.  What a shameful mess.  Trees & branches that blew down from the storm in August still lay around, fences are rusted apart & falling down, the shelter houses look a mess. 

Your state government at work. Or sleep, in this case.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 19, 2011, 09:40:53 AM
I'm sure their maintenance budget has been halved and halved again, but it's still a disgrace to see that piece of property neglected.  I'm embarrassed to take people down there now.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on November 19, 2011, 10:08:44 AM
I'm sure their maintenance budget has been halved and halved again, but it's still a disgrace to see that piece of property neglected.  I'm embarrassed to take people down there now.

And I expect anti-city Johnny K is hoping we'll all stay away. Anyway, back to the highway project.....
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on November 20, 2011, 11:01:41 PM
Oh it's on:


Cleveland Mayor Jackson, council members blasting ODOT for handling of West Shoreway project

Published: Monday, November 21, 2011, 12:06 AM
Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

CLEVELAND, Ohio --

Flashing rarely seen anger, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson said he is outraged by the way ODOT is treating the city's long-held dream of converting the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard.

But an ODOT spokesman indicated the city's pursuit of more money for the project faces long odds -- especially when Cleveland wants to reduce speed "on a perfectly good roadway."

They were shocked by the low score the city's $28.2 million request for the project's second phase has received in early reviews from state transportation officials.

ODOT is too focused on moving traffic and undervalues the project's benefits to the community, city officials said.

"I honestly believe they don't want it to go forward," Jackson said in an interview at The Plain Dealer.

In fact, more state money will be hard to come by, given that ODOT has already committed $50 million to the shoreway project, ODOT spokesman Steve Faulkner said Friday afternoon.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/11/cleveland_mayor_jackson_counci.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/11/cleveland_mayor_jackson_counci.html)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jhonopolis on November 21, 2011, 12:16:21 AM
But they continue to throw money away on new highway sound walls in Mentor on route 2 for a development built years ago, AFTER the highway was built! They knew they were buying next to the highway! Pisses me off. Also, does the Lake County route 2 project switching to asphalt after originally using concrete have anything to do with the new head of ODOT's connection to the asphalt industry?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on November 21, 2011, 12:26:15 AM
But they continue to throw money away on new highway sound walls in Mentor on route 2 for a development built years ago, AFTER the highway was built! They knew they were buying next to the highway! Pisses me off. Also, does the Lake County route 2 project switching to asphalt after originally using concrete have anything to do with the new head of ODOT's connection to the asphalt industry?

Neighbors usually don't ask for sound walls, ODOT puts them in to comply with federal requirements whenever there's a federally funded change to the design of a highway. The community can opt out of them if they know they can opt out.

Not sure about the choice to use asphalt on Route 2.

Both are good issues to discuss in the ODOT thread.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 21, 2011, 06:34:07 AM
I shouldn't do it to myself, but reading the comments on the latest PD articles really shows how uneducated people are about the scope & intent of this project...   it's a shame.  Many more people would support it if there was better efforts to inform and create interest among the many west siders who just zip along...
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BuckeyeB on November 21, 2011, 06:57:53 AM
I shouldn't do it to myself, but reading the comments on the latest PD articles really shows how uneducated people are about the scope & intent of this project...   it's a shame.  Many more people would support it if there was better efforts to inform and create interest among the many west siders who just zip along...

I wonder how many of these commenters are from the 'burbs?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: jhonopolis on November 21, 2011, 07:05:55 AM
Seems like a lot from Lakewood. There afraid there quick drive through Cleveland will be taken away from them.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: BuckeyeB on November 21, 2011, 07:14:02 AM
Please be encouraged to fight the good fight in the comments sections...

Bait and switch: Ohio transportation officials need to stop putting up roadblocks as Cleveland tries to transform the Shoreway and its lakefront: editorial
Published: Saturday, November 19, 2011, 9:40 AM
The Plain Dealer Editorial Board By The Plain Dealer Editorial Board


ODOT officials have moved the goal posts so often that Clevelanders from Mayor Frank Jackson on down have every right to feel disrespected and to wonder what it will take to complete a project that promises to revamp the city's relationship with its lakefront.

Most recently, after Cleveland city planners attempted to trim costs by shaving the once-ambitious plans yet again, ODOT informed them that the price tag had unexpectedly gone up again -- almost doubling since their last estimate. So at the suggestion of top ODOT officials, the Jackson administration applied for another $28 million through the department's review process for identifying priority projects -- and promised to come up with an extra $7 million from the city's limited capital funds. But when ODOT scored the city's request, it was near the bottom of 72 proposals.

ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.


The ODOT committee that makes funding decisions meets Dec. 15. Its members need to take a long, hard look at both the commitments they have already made and at the staff's latest, skewed analysis of the Shoreway project.

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html (http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html)

Your state government at work---perpetuating the status quo by insisting on more roads---and working against areas that want alternatives. I really think the only solution for NE Ohio is to bypass the state's anti-urban tendencies and find ways to go it alone on this and many other issues. The state is not going to help.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: urbanlife on November 21, 2011, 09:34:57 AM


Cleveland Mayor Jackson, council members blasting ODOT for handling of West Shoreway project


It's good to see the city step up to fight for this project.  I hope they will continue to fight for the original vision of this corridor (and not what was submitted in the last TRAC application).  The city's current proposal for phase II is the one that removed much of the bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure - or at least reprioritized it to unfunded status.

My fear is that even if money is found for this project, it is so far gone from the original vision in the early 2000s of multiple intersections, retail, residential, multi-modal access, etc.

The original concept of at least a few at grade intersections and much improved pedestrian and bicycle elements needs to be put back on the table.  IMO, you can't create a boulevard just by lowering the speed limit and planting some trees in the middle for $35million - you need to actually have pedestrian and bicycle access, and open up additional land for development and other uses.  Otherwise, you've basically just created a "nicer" limited access highway, perhaps with a lower speed limit.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on November 21, 2011, 04:10:52 PM
Lowering the speed limit to 35mph and putting in a few landscaping elements doesn't make it a boulevard. The problem is this is still being touted as a lakefront development plan when that vision died years ago. Putting a median and another bike path on a highway that at points is 3/4 of a mile away from the lake is hardly lakefront development. Why isn't the city fighting for the full fledged plan or at least the possibility of going back to it?

I want Clifton Blvd and its mix of apartments, houses, shops, and restaurants extended along this new boulevard. Where is this plan?Where are the current designs that show this? Now that would be a development plan versus some absurd 100 million dollar median.

This city and every suburb (Can you believe not one city from Lorain to Mentor decided to put in a strip of commercial development along its lakeshore!) is to blame for poor planning, past and present.

The reality is that all of the lakeshore is occupied by something. If you want to develop it, you have to remove something or extend the shoreline farther into the lake. We are afraid to touch that subject, so instead we tout inland projects as lakefront to skirt the obvious. The only way that a boulevard conversion here will work is if we sell off/lease parts of Edgewater Park for private development. Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MyTwoSense on November 21, 2011, 04:13:09 PM
Lowering the speed limit to 35mph and putting in a few landscaping elements doesn't make it a boulevard. The problem is this is still being touted as a lakefront development plan when that vision died years ago. Putting a median and another bike path on a highway that at points is 3/4 of a mile away from the lake is hardly lakefront development. Why isn't the city fighting for the full fledged plan or at least the possibility of going back to it?

I want Clifton Blvd and its mix of apartments, houses, shops, and restaurants extended along this new boulevard. Where is this plan?Where are the current designs that show this? Now that would be a development plan versus some absurd 100 million dollar median.

This city and every suburb (Can you believe not one city from Lorain to Mentor decided to put in a strip of commercial development along its lakeshore!) is to blame for poor planning, past and present.

The reality is that all of the lakeshore is occupied by something. If you want to develop it, you have to remove something or extend the shoreline farther into the lake. We are afraid to touch that subject, so instead we tout inland projects as lakefront to skirt the obvious. The only way that a boulevard conversion here will work is if we sell off/lease parts of Edgewater Park for private development. Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

And exactly where is the money coming from?
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on November 21, 2011, 04:28:38 PM

And exactly where is the money coming from?

Well, my last sentence was just a plan ... about as pie in the sky as Jane Campbell's plan. However, the baby steps of actually developing the Shoreway for development is a realistic option that wouldn't cost the city insane amounts of money.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 21, 2011, 06:47:12 PM
The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path?

Increased connection and pedestrian access points to the existing neighborhoods, increased recreation options with new multi-use paths, increased safety by redesigning the 25th/28th interchange, increased vehicle access to the Gordon Square & Battery Park neighborhoods which are currently only accessed by backtracking from Clifton on the west or from east coming off 49th/Tillman.  I can tell you first hand the residents of these existing neighborhoods are overwhelmed by the increased traffic these new developments have brought.  A new outlet is needed in the worst way.

Perhaps it would be beneficial if everyone went back & read the latest ODOT presentation on the project before commenting....  http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Presentations/Documents/86478_2010-02-04_Design_Review_Presentation.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Presentations/Documents/86478_2010-02-04_Design_Review_Presentation.pdf)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: 327 on November 21, 2011, 07:39:39 PM
^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

Me too.  Well put.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on November 23, 2011, 03:13:37 PM
Article from RustWire:

ODOT to Cleveland: Drop Dead!
23 November 2011

There periodically arise big moments in urban development—moments that can affect a city’s life course. Here in Cleveland we are at one of those moments. The issue is whether or not we can finally break through the walls that have divided us from the Lake.

http://rustwire.com/2011/11/23/odot-to-cleveland-drop-dead/ (http://rustwire.com/2011/11/23/odot-to-cleveland-drop-dead/)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on November 23, 2011, 03:17:55 PM
One more:

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/11/23/ohio-a-state-dot-that-try-to-doesnt-hide-its-total-disregard-for-bike-ped/ (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/11/23/ohio-a-state-dot-that-try-to-doesnt-hide-its-total-disregard-for-bike-ped/)
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on November 23, 2011, 10:48:39 PM

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

I disagree.  The last thing Cleveland needs is another "pocket" of development that is unconnected to any other growing areas of the city.   The Shoreway conversion is a great opportunity to FINALLY have connection in Cleveland.   For too long there have been these small pockets of development for urban pioneers (Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit Shoreway, etc) that never fully grow to their potential and connect to the others.   I see this as an investment in connection of already existing neighborhoods that will only lead to drawing more people into the city.  People that would have been previously frightened of those "nether regions" in between currently existing pockets of new and revitalized housing.    Imagine Ohio City finally connected to Detroit Shoreway connected to Clifton/Edgewater.   Game changing.   No marina can offer that.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Flee2theCleve on November 24, 2011, 06:59:31 AM
^I don't understand your point. Are you saying these areas aren't connected already? Certainly not in the literal sense. If you are talking about robust development linking all these neighborhoods, that is a tall order to ask any one project to spur.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 24, 2011, 07:57:20 AM
^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.
Me too.  Well put.

I get that alot of people on this board & elsewhere feel like the Shoreway project doesn't go far enough to create lakefront development but if it remains a concrete divided highway, that development will NEVER happen.  This project needs to go forward so that sometime down the line, the basics are there to allow development along a 35mph boulevard....

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: surfohio on November 24, 2011, 04:34:34 PM
Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.


I agree with you! The state is an absentee landlord. I've floated the privatize argument before an you know what, it scares people. So does the prospect of charging admission, which I disagree with. But the right, limited mix of retail and residential could generate the much-needed income for the park.

Shoot, I've been to elevated, boardwalk retail plazas in the outer banks that would cover the same footprint as the current bath house (ick) and Honey Hut. There would still be room for a nice, Metroparks quality nature center.

I also agree 100 percent with Gottaplan on his boardwalk concept. Add a retail component and there is another unique-to-Cleveland magnet for commerce and growth. It's worth exploring how a series of boardwalks can better connect us to the lake/river. It's really an idea whose time has come.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: KJP on November 25, 2011, 08:40:25 AM
This is a great topic of discussion -- for the Edgewater Park thread.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on November 26, 2011, 09:28:50 AM

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

I disagree.  The last thing Cleveland needs is another "pocket" of development that is unconnected to any other growing areas of the city.   The Shoreway conversion is a great opportunity to FINALLY have connection in Cleveland.   For too long there have been these small pockets of development for urban pioneers (Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit Shoreway, etc) that never fully grow to their potential and connect to the others.   I see this as an investment in connection of already existing neighborhoods that will only lead to drawing more people into the city.  People that would have been previously frightened of those "nether regions" in between currently existing pockets of new and revitalized housing.    Imagine Ohio City finally connected to Detroit Shoreway connected to Clifton/Edgewater.   Game changing.   No marina can offer that.

I wouldn't say "finally" connected, the Detroit Shoreway has always been connected to Edgewater/Clifton via Lake and Detroit Avenues west of Gordon Square. These areas have yet to be revitalized and continue to crumble into one of the most crime ridden neighborhoods on Cleveland's west side. A Shoreway conversion project bypasses the organic and historic connection of these neighborhoods in favor of a development free boulevard. The only way that DS can be physically connected is through a boulevard full of development, or the revitalization of Lake Avenue between Detroit and Clifton. Adding a median and putting in more pedestrian paths (as has been noted, a bike/pedestrian path already parallels the Shoreway right now from W 65th to West Blvd, with the Battery Park connection almost complete), without putting in at grade intersections puts off the "full west shoreway" dream for decades. The ODOT plan now sucks, and if people just accept it and let it go through, good luck ever getting a true lake connection in the near future. In terms of neighborhood cohesion, there needs to be at least a few physical structures to actually connect the neighborhoods along this route, I just don't see how a median accomplishes it.

Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: WestBLVD on November 26, 2011, 09:42:09 AM
^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.
Me too.  Well put.

I get that alot of people on this board & elsewhere feel like the Shoreway project doesn't go far enough to create lakefront development but if it remains a concrete divided highway, that development will NEVER happen.  This project needs to go forward so that sometime down the line, the basics are there to allow development along a 35mph boulevard....



Yes, that's my sentiment. I think the ODOT plan now is terrible. It's sort of a gamble, do you go ahead with this plan now and then hope that 20 years down the road you can improve upon it. Or do you hold out 5-8 years and hope that times change and the original concept can go forth? It's probably best just to go ahead and do something now, even if it means prolonging the desired results decades into the future.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 30, 2011, 06:43:20 AM
I think if this latest plan is mothballed, it's going to be a wet blanket on any further development in the area.  Alot of the progress has been contingent on this latest version of the plan moving forward according to schedules outlined and updated for several years now.

Reminder, community meeting is tomorrow night, Thursday, 6-8pm, December 1st at Franklin Circle Community Church, located at 1688 Fulton Rd. in Cleveland regarding the possible funding cuts to the West Shoreway project by ODOT.  City of Cleveland Planning Director Robert Brown will be joined by Councilman Matt Zone, Councilman Joe Cimperman, and Councilman Jay Westbrook to receive input from the community regarding this project.


Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: Cleburger on November 30, 2011, 09:47:12 AM
Are any UO's planning on attending this?  I am out-of-town for work and won't be able to attend.
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: gottaplan on November 30, 2011, 09:55:54 AM
I'll be there
Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
Post by: cd-cleveland on November 30, 2011, 11:27:30 AM
Are any UO's planning on attending this?  I am out-of-town for work and won't be able to attend.

    The bike community is a little irritated by the removal of planned bicycle infrastructure, and will be out in full force:
    https://www.facebook.com/events/189460277804769/ (https://www.facebook.com/events/189460277804769/)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: cd-cleveland on November 30, 2011, 11:41:29 AM
    More from Bike Cleveland, the new nonprofit cycling advocacy organization.
    ---

    West Shoreway Public Meeting

    We are writing to encourage you to attend a very important public meeting for Cleveland's bike community that is taking place Thursday, December 1st from 6-8pm at Franklin Circle Christian Church.

    Bicycle and pedestrian connections to Cleveland’s lakefront are in jeopardy. The City of Cleveland and the Ohio Department of Transportation are discussing ways to cut costs on the West Shoreway project, and the multi-purpose trail along the lakefront is in danger of being cut from current funding.
    Bike Cleveland is encouraging you to attend to hear about the changes and to tell the decision makers to keep their promise and invest in biking and walking on the West Shoreway.

    The expectation of Bike Cleveland is that the West Shoreway plan will make active modes a priority as they were in the initial Lakefront Plan from 2004. The plan should incorporate dedicated bike and pedestrian infrastructure in the initial, funded round of construction. Project aims related to auto infrastructure take a secondary position to that original priority. For more on Bike Cleveland's position regarding the West Shoreway read our op-ed submitted to the Plain Dealer.

    We need all cyclists and supporters of cycling to attend this crucial public meeting:

    WEST SHOREWAY PUBLIC MEETING
    Thursday, December 1st from 6pm-8pm
    Franklin Circle Christian Church
    1688 Fulton Avenue
    Cleveland, OH 44113
     
    Let us know you are coming to the meeting and tell your friends on Facebook. There will also be a group riding to the meeting from Joy Machines Bike Shop at 5:45pm.

    We are also asking supporters of including multipurpose trails in the funded portion of the West Shoreway to sign our petition.

    We hope to see you tomorrow night at the public meeting. Lets show the city that we support bicycle and pedestrian investments!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 30, 2011, 02:21:02 PM
    The mayor is also promoting this meeting......

    http://portal.cleveland-oh.gov/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=11263 (http://portal.cleveland-oh.gov/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=11263)

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    November 30, 2011
    News Advisory
    West Shoreway Community Meeting

    CLEVELAND – On Thursday, December 1, 2011 at 6:00 pm the City of Cleveland, its Planning Commission and City Council Members Joe Cimperman, Matt Zone and Jay Westbrook will host a community meeting regarding the West Shoreway project at Franklin Circle Christian Church. There will be an update on the project, as well as an open dialog on issues and concerns.

    WHO: Jay Westbrook, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 16
    Joe Cimperman, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 3
    Matt Zone, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 15
    Chris Warren, Chief of Regional Development, Office of the Mayor
    Robert Brown, Director, City Planning Commission

    WHAT: Community Meeting to discuss West Shoreway project

    WHEN: Thursday, December 1, 2011
    6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

    WHERE: Franklin Circle Christian Church
    1688 Fulton Road
    Cleveland

    - 30 -
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: cd-cleveland on November 30, 2011, 05:13:56 PM
    Bike Cleveland has started a petition to present to the city and state that states that bike infrastructure should be included in Phase I of the project.  If you'd like to sign, please visit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDRLcEo2RlpnbmxVaVNKbnJHS2tqTkE6MQ.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 30, 2011, 05:29:43 PM
    Well, there's always the courts......

    Environmental groups sue San Diego Association of Governments over $214B Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities plan; first regional plan under SB 375
    28 November 2011

    The Cleveland National Forest Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in the San Diego Superior Court against the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), challenging SANDAG’s $214-billion 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS). According to the groups, SANDAG used a deficient process to develop a plan that will over-invests in freeways at the expense of public transit, increased pollution and exacerbated global climate change.

    The San Diego region is the first in California to produce a regional transportation plan with an SCS as required by SB 375, a new state law intended to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through compact land-use and transportation planning. (Earlier post.) SANDAG approved the plan on 28 Oct after two years of work.

    READ MORE AT:
    http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/11/sandag-20111128.html (http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/11/sandag-20111128.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 02, 2011, 08:10:56 AM
    How did the meeting go?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 02, 2011, 08:45:50 AM
    Not good.  Pretty much all bad news.  Where do I start...  Nobody from ODOT was there.  The TRAC funding scoresheet was reviewed and it's unfathomable the project didn't score higher.  The renovation of the 76th tunnel that was started in 2010 is still on hold due to issues with the RR slope stabilization.  The costs for the interchange at 73rd are getting higher by the day and that's becoming unlikely.  The work at the 25th/28th intersection, probably the most needed aspect of the project from a safety standpoint, is so far out, it shouldn't even be considered a reality in my opinion.  The actual boulevard conversion is a pipe dream at this point.  That's just my take though, anyone else who was there, feel free to share your take
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on December 02, 2011, 08:50:57 AM
    ^ That doesnt sound good.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on December 02, 2011, 09:29:22 AM
    wow, no one from ODOT was there??
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: archangel on December 02, 2011, 10:34:08 AM
    I suggest pursuing other sources of funding: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/12/china_wants_to_invest_in_us_ro.html (http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/12/china_wants_to_invest_in_us_ro.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 02, 2011, 01:52:52 PM
    Was Mayor Jackson there? 

    Did the council members show? 

    What did they have to say about all this?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 02, 2011, 02:13:08 PM
    I heard there was 250 people there?

    NOACA Director Howard Maier recently spoke at a Geauga County Tea Party meeting where they pretty much surmised he was a tool used by and for the federal funding system. But while there, these folks expressed great hatred for using any of their federal tax dollars for bike lanes. Consider that most of the top people in Ohio's government (regardless of party) for the past 40 years are from exurban and rural parts of Ohio. This is why ODOT has no statutory or funding ability to undertake the kinds of inclusive (of peds, bikes and transit) road projects that urbanized areas like Cleveland want. The fact that ODOT has been doing it in an exclusionary way for so long is why ODOT has little interest of trying anything else.

    So when Howard Maier was reminded that there was an opposing force to Geauga County's tea baggers who turned out last night at the Ohio City church, he seemed to scoff that it was only Cleveland city officials who were there. I'm surprised they were able to get 250 city employees to turn out at this meeting. :-P But NOACA tends to scoff at the public sometimes, except apparently when they're out in Geauga County, living in Mcmansions and giving Lexus' to each other for Christmas.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 02, 2011, 04:21:41 PM
    tea baggers?  250 city employees?  What?

    Yes there was easily 250 people there, big contingent of bike enthusiasts, but also neighborhood members from the Ohio City, Detroit Shoreway & Clifton/Edgewater.

    Councilmen Zone, Cimperman & Westbrook were all there along with Ken Sillman, Chris Warren from Mayor's office, Mike Skindell & some lady from Kucinich's office.  Someone commented that the Cleveland business community ranked the Shoreway project as the #1 transportation project priority behind the Innerbelt bridge, but they apparently have no sway with the TRAC members and apparently there is nobody on this board from the Cleveland area.  Apparently there was but they were dismissed after not attending meetings.  Unbelievable.  Alot of underlying comments indicating "they don't like us" meaning Columbus doesn't want to help Cleveland's urban projects.  But the more details come out, it seems like a lot of missed opportunities from Cleveland leaders to make sure this project, which everyone agrees is so vital, is not getting done.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 02, 2011, 06:35:38 PM
    Everyone does not agree that this project is vital.  A lot of locals are against it, though not strongly enough to attend a meeting and argue their point.  ODOT's doing a good job of that already... so we don't need to.  I think if it were made clear that new interchanges and bike paths were the extent of it, that might fly.  But the notion of a full "boulevard conversion" is not nearly as popular as its proponents seem to believe.  Time for a rebranding, perhaps.  How about "West Shoreway Upgrade Package?"  Everyone likes upgrades. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 02, 2011, 07:06:08 PM
    tea baggers?  250 city employees?  What?

    The Geauga County tea party thinks federal funding of bike paths is pointless. Their fellow taxpayers who spoke up last night in support of bike paths disagree (but perhaps Geauga County tea baggers support the continued use of federal tax dollars to add horse & buggy lanes in their Amish Country? Maybe that's something urbanites should oppose?)

    And please note the :-P after the 250 city employees. That is an inference of sarcasm, humor, light-heartedness, etc. to make fun of Howard Maier's inference that city officials orchestrated the meeting in Ohio City. So that must mean all 250 people at that meeting where city officials. Try to keep up with me, OK? :-P

    Everyone does not agree that this project is vital.  A lot of locals are against it, though not strongly enough to attend a meeting and argue their point.

    Ah yes, the silent majority. I sure missed you. Where ya been since Nixon desperately conjured you in the face of Vietnam War protests? It didn't work then either.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 02, 2011, 07:36:19 PM
    Nice try, but this particular "silent majority" is mostly liberal urbanists, many of whom love walking and biking.  If this project were framed as a multipurpose path and better access, it would be loved by everyone.  Except the teabaggers of course.  There's no pleasing them.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 02, 2011, 07:41:01 PM
    But most of the people who attended last night were opposing the project because ODOT is stripping out the pedestrian and biking elements. They weren't being silent at all.

    EDIT: you made it sound like the silent majority was supporting ODOT's position.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 02, 2011, 07:44:07 PM
    327 - you're not a fan of the project, I get it.  What I meant when I said "everyone agrees is so vital" was the councilmen, the mayor, the state congressman, etc...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 02, 2011, 07:55:29 PM
    I'm supportive of the project's current incarnation.  And I think the ghost of prior overreach may be holding it back.  A clear statement that "boulevard conversion" is no longer a live issue might help.  Fix the ramps, add one for 73rd, do the multipurpose path... I don't think anyone opposes those ideas.  But we have too many needs to be tearing up existing assets.  That's the sticking point.  Why not compromise?  Insisting on "boulevard conversion" places the interests of Detroit-Shoreway against those of Edgewater and half of Lakewood.  There's no need for that.  We have the opportunity to add something for the former while taking nothing away from the latter.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 03, 2011, 02:18:35 PM
    We have the opportunity to add something for the former while taking nothing away from the latter.

    And how would you do that?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 03, 2011, 03:12:31 PM
    By converting the freeway into a boulevard you can recapture a great deal of prime lakefront real estate for development, where now you only have buffer zones for exit ramps.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 03, 2011, 03:16:54 PM
    (http://www.cleveland.com/economy/images/shoreway.gif)

    heres a good diagram of what this article is talking about
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 04, 2011, 02:03:16 AM
    Yep. It was an awesome plan that hopefully can be revived.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 04, 2011, 11:22:17 AM
    We have the opportunity to add something for the former while taking nothing away from the latter.

    And how would you do that?

    By advancing with the more recent scaled-back version of the plan.  Boulevard conversion = No.  Multipurpose path, infrastructure improvements, tunnel renovation, W 73rd ramp construction, W 25th ramp reconstruction = Yes.  Those living south of the shoreway receive multiple benefits, while those living west of it lose nothing.  That's what I call a win/win scenario.

    I'm not thrilled that our leaders are picking such a huge fight with Columbus over something that doesn't even enjoy broad support locally.  If ODOT wanted to run a freeway straight through Shaker Heights, I could maybe understand having a standoff.  But realistically, alienating state officials to this extent doesn't seem like a wise course of action unless we plan on seceding.  It jeopardizes the less controversial aspects of the shoreway plan as well as lord knows what else in the future.  I know, I know, they drew first blood by pointing out that the original plan could have substantial consequences for nearby residents. 

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: theguv on December 05, 2011, 08:45:13 PM
    With a goal of reconnecting neighborhoods to the lakefront, what do you all think of capping the shoreway from roughly W65 to Lake Ave?  Such a scenario would enable incredible connections between neighborhoods and the lakefront while continuing to expedite car traffic (ODoT  loves that idea).  The only thing in the way of N/S connections to the lakefront is the railroad.  You'd need to construct some pretty wide tunnels under the railroad to take advantage of the expanse offered by a great lawn crossing over the Shoreway.  Any idea on cost for capping such a large swath of roadway?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: X on December 05, 2011, 08:57:36 PM
    The cost would be tremendous.  I won't make a number guess, but it's very expensive to cap.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 05, 2011, 09:25:26 PM
    Perhaps a similar comparison could be Seattle's 5.2-acre Freeway Park, the first phase of which cost $24 million in 1976 or $95.5 million today (see: http://www.historicseattle.org/preservationseattle/pendinglandmarks/defaultSEPT06.htm (http://www.historicseattle.org/preservationseattle/pendinglandmarks/defaultSEPT06.htm) and http://www.seattle.gov/parks/park_detail.asp?ID=312 (http://www.seattle.gov/parks/park_detail.asp?ID=312)).

    (http://www.designundersky.com/storage/blog-images/2011/january-2011/sonic-spatialization/2249817853_39afda5a29_b.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1295716003064)

    As you can see, it's actually very small -- much smaller than the area from West 65th to near Lake Avenue:

    (http://www.seattle.gov/parks/_images/parks/downtownparks.jpg)

    This project included funding from: 

    Kings County Forward Thrust bonds, federal and state highway funds, developer R.C. Hedreen who placed his proposed 21-story Park Place building on the western edge of the lot and design a front plaza integrated with the proposed Freeway Park, and the City of Seattle placed its municipal parking garage near the freeway in order to intercept drivers before they got into the city core, hoping to reduce congestion, noise, and air pollution in the downtown.

    But it's pretty overgrown and had become a crime problem like the overgrown Chester Commons here in Cleveland.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on December 06, 2011, 05:55:15 PM
    The point is ODOT approved the entire plan, they scored it very high under the previous scoring system.   Now we have a new administration and the Scoring system changed, now it is scored poorly.   There were promises made, and they are not being kept.    Cleveland is the worse city for Access to the water front.  this plan by slowing the shoreway down helps to remove the biggest obstacle to accessing the lakefront.

    As a biker I have concerns about the way the Cycling community is approaching this, they lament the faxt that the Bike lane is pushed back to phase 3, while ignoring the facts that once the road is converted to a boulevard the road will be accessible to Cyclist to ride legally in the street.  I think once the Conversion is complete trafffic will be reduced enough to convert a lane into a multipurpose trail much like what was done to the Detroit/Superior bridge.  this would be he most cost effective way to make it a reality, because of ODOTs inflexible rules, It dramtically increases the cost to add a multipurpose lane, so much so it would be better to seek funding for it from other sources that would be less rigid in their interpretation of laws.

    The general problem with this development and people in general, are that the original passion for an issue which is used to bring about change are short lived while the opponents to such change have time to build opposition to any change, and as the original benefits fade from memory, the opponents gain momentum.  It is so hard to maintain support for change especially if the change takes so long to come about.    In class My professor talks about the temporal mismatch between Economic development and politics,  it some times takes and act of God to bring about the change People say they want but their attention spans do not allow for.

    On the 15th of this month they are organizing a caravan to Columbus to attend the ODOT meeting, the caravan leaves at 7 am from the parking lot behind the Capitol theater.  ODOTs behavior in this issue, the streetscape improvements on clfton, the interbelt bridge, etc, has to be stopped, they really don't care about issue important to the residents of cities, only care about traffic speed and nothing else.  no other part of state government is doing so much to hold ohio back, they must be stopped
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 06, 2011, 09:08:26 PM
    Traffic flow will always be an issue on a major commuter route... and barring substantial transit expansion, this will always be a major commuter route.  Why is it so important to put bikes in the same space as cars instead of adding a multipurpose path?  Why is it so important to "access the lake" via crosswalks instead of the tunnels we're already spending so much to renovate?  It seems like beneficial compromises are available here.  I strongly suggest we don't declare war on ODOT over this.  Also please keep in mind that there are adverse local interests as well, before you purport to speak for the entire community.

    A lot of people living west of the shoreway do not want a boulevard conversion.  It is absolutely unfair for their interests to be disregarded to the extent we're reaching here.  This is not a Cleveland city street... it's a state highway and two federal highways combined.  It belongs to everyone.  It belongs to people in Westlake and Peoria too.  ODOT is not trying to halt progress, prevent cycling, isolate Lake Erie, or impinge upon Battery Park.  Claiming that they are sounds childish.  Refusing to compromise with your neighbors doesn't sound too cool either.  Surely we can work this out.       
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 06, 2011, 10:04:54 PM
    327 - please go back & review my comments from the meeting last week.  What you've proposed is essentially what is likely to be built.  The funding is in place for 73rd connection, possibly 25th/28th intersection, and everything else is about 10 yrs out or never.  Sound good to you?  By then, the existing Shoreway pavement will be crumbling, Obama will be in his 4th term, gas powered personal transit will be a thing of the past....   and that landscaped boulevard conversion will make a lot of sense.  So let's take this argument back up in 9.5 yrs, ok?

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 07, 2011, 03:42:40 AM
    It is the same route/highway as Clifton Blvd in Lakewood.  If the people of Westlake and Peoria insisted on changing Clifton into a highway, shouldn't Lakewood have a say?

    All this project would do would extend Clifton through the entire westside, not just Edgewater/ Lakewood
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 07, 2011, 06:03:58 AM
    It is the same route/highway as Clifton Blvd in Lakewood.  If the people of Westlake and Peoria insisted on changing Clifton into a highway, shouldn't Lakewood have a say?

    All this project would do would extend Clifton through the entire westside, not just Edgewater/ Lakewood

    Yeah, I'm not sure why people are so up in arms about this, ESPECIALLY UrbanOhio people.  And it seems many of the same people who are against the Opportunity Corridor boulevard are for keeping this road a limited access freeway.  It makes no sense.  An extra 2 or 3 minutes added to a commute from a suburb isn't a game changer.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: urbanlife on December 07, 2011, 07:15:40 AM
    It is the same route/highway as Clifton Blvd in Lakewood.  If the people of Westlake and Peoria insisted on changing Clifton into a highway, shouldn't Lakewood have a say?

    All this project would do would extend Clifton through the entire westside, not just Edgewater/ Lakewood

    Yeah, I'm not sure why people are so up in arms about this, ESPECIALLY UrbanOhio people.  And it seems many of the same people who are against the Opportunity Corridor boulevard are for keeping this road a limited access freeway.  It makes no sense.  An extra 2 or 3 minutes added to a commute from a suburb isn't a game changer.

    +1

    also, it was interesting to hear that the shoreway at one time had more than 82,000 vehicles per day.  it is now in the low 30,000s.  A huge decrease in traffic with the same number of lanes, speed limit, etc. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 07, 2011, 07:37:55 AM
    An extra 2-3 minutes would not bother anyone but that isn't what we're talking about.  For example, a couple months ago inbound shoreway traffic was diverted onto Lake and Detroit because of a fallen tree.  It didn't add 2 or 3 or 10 minutes, it added an hour and a half.  Cars and buses were backed up throughout Edgewater and well into Lakewood.  People living on the south side of Clifton couldn't exit their driveways or sidestreets.  Emergency vehicles have trouble getting around in those conditions too.  Another example: a couple years ago, sewer work reduced the shoreway's capacity by about 50% at the bottleneck.  Traffic backed up throughout Edgewater and well into Lakewood on a daily basis. 

    That's why people are up in arms... they don't want a honking traffic jam right in front of their house every morning, and they don't want a 5 mile commute to take an hour plus.  Is there no compromise possible?       
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 07, 2011, 08:08:59 AM
    327, you're talking about an unforeseen emergency that redirected cars, buses, etc.  The Shoreway was essentially CLOSED with no notice!!!   Of course traffic was backed up!!!  Big difference between that & a 10-15 mph slow down (which probably won't be enforced).   It's ridiculous to draw comparisons between a weather emergency and some planned slight reduction in speed which keeps the same # of lanes...

    How about the sewer project which closed a lane in both directions right at the Westinghouse curve which didn't impede the flow of traffic whatsoever...   forget it, I can't believe I got sucked into this conversation again.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 07, 2011, 09:13:25 AM
    It is the same route/highway as Clifton Blvd in Lakewood.  If the people of Westlake and Peoria insisted on changing Clifton into a highway, shouldn't Lakewood have a say?

    All this project would do would extend Clifton through the entire westside, not just Edgewater/ Lakewood

    Yeah, I'm not sure why people are so up in arms about this, ESPECIALLY UrbanOhio people.  And it seems many of the same people who are against the Opportunity Corridor boulevard are for keeping this road a limited access freeway.  It makes no sense.  An extra 2 or 3 minutes added to a commute from a suburb isn't a game changer.

    Amen Jeff!

    I don't understand the negativism on this project?   Since when does anyone on Urban Ohio concern themselves with a commuter in Rocky River or Westlake?   Slow it down.  Perhaps this will add ammo for our friends at All Aboard Ohio for commuter rail via the Lakewood corridor.   

    I live in the Clifton/Edgewater neighborhood, and I can tell you it won't make a difference.  The traffic already backs up from the Shoreway back into Lakewood at peak times.   As soon as the morning commuters hit the Shoreway it's 75 MPH race to W6th.   But this won't change anything for those of us with the backups already.  If we were concerned we'd sell and move to Avon Lake.   I'd rather be able to walk pleasantly along the multi trail to Edgewater, the boat clubs and points east into downtown.

    I stand by my assertion that this is ONE game-changing project for the City of Cleveland that can make a difference in the future of our city.   No casino, aquarium or other single project stands to tie together existing rehabbing neighborhoods, bring residents back in the city, and most importantly jump start a vision to reclaim our lakefront from prior mistakes.   We need to do this.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 07, 2011, 09:34:13 AM
    An extra 2-3 minutes would not bother anyone but that isn't what we're talking about.  For example, a couple months ago inbound shoreway traffic was diverted onto Lake and Detroit because of a fallen tree.  It didn't add 2 or 3 or 10 minutes, it added an hour and a half.  Cars and buses were backed up throughout Edgewater and well into Lakewood.  People living on the south side of Clifton couldn't exit their driveways or sidestreets.  Emergency vehicles have trouble getting around in those conditions too.  Another example: a couple years ago, sewer work reduced the shoreway's capacity by about 50% at the bottleneck.  Traffic backed up throughout Edgewater and well into Lakewood on a daily basis. 

    That's why people are up in arms... they don't want a honking traffic jam right in front of their house every morning, and they don't want a 5 mile commute to take an hour plus.  Is there no compromise possible?       

    We're talking about a plan to make the shoreway a boulevard, not plopping a tree down the middle of the road by surprise.  How can you even compare the effects of the two?

    EDIT: Sorry, I see someone else already responded similarly, but I had this page open for a while without refreshing and didn't see it before I posted.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 07, 2011, 12:22:51 PM
    This plan will not redirect traffic from the Shoreway onto a more narrow street with its own traffic, stop lights, numerous street-side businesses, etc. Nor will it replicate the built-environment conditions along Detroit Avenue on the Shoreway. The plan as originally proposed would continue a high-volume six-lane roadway albeit SLIGHTLY slower with several intersections. How many intersections and traffic lights are there along Detroit from Lake Avenue to downtown? 20? 30? How many lanes are there along Detroit Avenue? Four lanes where there is no parking and two lanes where there is?

    Think for a moment, 327. Do you really believe that the Shoreway project as originally envisioned would replicate the impacts of completely closing the Shoreway's six lanes to all traffic? Why would you even suggest that as a possible outcome?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Confiteordeo on December 07, 2011, 04:01:25 PM
    +1

    also, it was interesting to hear that the shoreway at one time had more than 82,000 vehicles per day.  it is now in the low 30,000s.  A huge decrease in traffic with the same number of lanes, speed limit, etc. 

    I was at the public meeting last week, and this point (along with the fact that reducing the speed limit from 50 to 35 adds 75 seconds from Lake/Clifton to downtown) was what finally convinced me that the boulevard conversion per se wouldn't cause a dramatic problem for commuting.

    It also convinced me that the original plan to add intersections with stoplights wasn't that big of a deal, either.  There were only like four or five intersections planned, and even if you were to hit every light, the trip would be much less impeded than the current trip down Detroit with a gazillion lights and narrower ROW.

    Basically, we'd be trading a freeway (which may have been needed in the 40s or 50s, when the Shoreway was built as such,) for an expressway (even with the lights.)

    EDIT:  I see KJP made the same basic point in his post.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on December 07, 2011, 05:30:40 PM
    This plan will not redirect traffic from the Shoreway onto a more narrow street with its own traffic, stop lights, numerous street-side businesses, etc. Nor will it replicate the built-environment conditions along Detroit Avenue on the Shoreway. The plan as originally proposed would continue a high-volume six-lane roadway albeit SLIGHTLY slower with several intersections. How many intersections and traffic lights are there along Detroit from Lake Avenue to downtown? 20? 30? How many lanes are there along Detroit Avenue? Four lanes where there is no parking and two lanes where there is?

    Think for a moment, 327. Do you really believe that the Shoreway project as originally envisioned would replicate the impacts of completely closing the Shoreway's six lanes to all traffic? Why would you even suggest that as a possible outcome?


    the intersections which would have performed the primary function of traffic calming, were removed by ODOT 3 years ago, due to "congestion"

    the opposition to this project are NIMBY.  the question is how much more traffic will move to I90 after the opening of the second inner belt bridge opens and how much traffic will be able to divert to I90.
     
    The new bridge will eliminate the bottleneck that is the ramp from I90 west to the central artery.  in a few years there will be Two lanes from I90 west onto the bridge and 3 lanes from I71 onto the bridge, with no merge between I90 and I71.

    Following the theory of Induced Traffic, means that slowing the Shoreway down could further reduce Traffic on the Shore way, making more people detour to I90 instead. either way the shore way as configured is not needed, according to NOACA the Shore way only carries 5000-10,000 more traffic than Chester which is a  boulevard, that is 15% to 30% more than the Freeway, and it has ~15 stop lights between UC and downtown, the nrw shore way would have NO stop lights.

    ODOT congestion estimates are notoriously Questionable.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 07, 2011, 05:57:36 PM
    Think for a moment, 327. Do you really believe that the Shoreway project as originally envisioned would replicate the impacts of completely closing the Shoreway's six lanes to all traffic? Why would you even suggest that as a possible outcome?

    We're talking about a plan to make the shoreway a boulevard, not plopping a tree down the middle of the road by surprise.  How can you even compare the effects of the two?

    Detroit gets virtually no commuter traffic on a normal day so it was largely a substitution of one road for another.  An identical road to the proposed boulevard?  Of course not, but keep in mind that once the backup has commenced, "traffic calming" measures like stoplights and speed limits don't count for much.  People are ignoring intersections and moving 5 mph if at all.  The conduit is overwhelmed at that point, and the only solution is for cars to stop showing up at the back of the line, because capacity is a fixed constant.  Similar effects are observable downtown after special events.

    Even on the worst days, backups rarely extend west beyond Bunts Road because it provides spillover to 90.  So does 117th, but that's the last one till West Boulevard, which serves poorly as a cut-through.  So for all those claiming that these concerns carry no weight because they belong to people in Rocky River (really?), the brunt of this traffic problem would be felt in Edgewater, which is nominally within the city of Cleveland.  For Lakewood to be affected at all, Edgewater must first be slammed from end to end.  I really don't see this as a city vs suburb issue, and I really don't think we get far by stoking city vs suburb issues anyway.  Or Cleveland vs ODOT issues.

    The fact that people would even consider pushing this at the same time as the innerbelt project suggests that we're throwing logistical concerns out the window, so no quantity of actual traffic nightmares on this route-- which are otherwise rare in Cleveland-- are likely to be persuasive.  This has become an us vs them issue driven by emotions.  That doesn't help our community, nor does it help the image of the urbanist movement in general. 

    We should be seeking common ground with those who don't share our philosophy.  We should be identifying approaches that can win hearts and minds, projects that can make our point without raising new counterpoints.  Above all, we should avoid setting up conflicts between Cleveland neighborhoods, or between the city and adjacent communities.

           
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 07, 2011, 06:51:50 PM


    We should be seeking common ground with those who don't share our philosophy.  We should be identifying approaches that can win hearts and minds, projects that can make our point without raising new counterpoints.  Above all, we should avoid setting up conflicts between Cleveland neighborhoods, or between the city and adjacent communities.

           

    To the contrary, this project would bring together neighborhoods in a much-needed fashion.  Ohio City, Gordon Square and Clifton/Baltic/Edgewater all stand to benefit from this connection.   I've been living in or around downtown since the early 1990's and one of my biggest complaints in Cleveland is the lack of connection between these neighborhoods.   To this day there has been growth en our urban pioneer enclaves (like Ohio City, Tremont and more recently, Gordon Square).   But they remain isolated pockets, never reaching out to touch each other.   The Shoreway conversion is an amazing opportunity to connect Downtown to Ohio City to Gordon Square to Clifton/Edgewater (and each of the aforementioned to the Lakefront as well).  To this end I say is our best possible "common ground."
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 07, 2011, 07:05:02 PM
    The fact that people would even consider pushing this at the same time as the innerbelt project suggests that we're throwing logistical concerns out the window, so no quantity of actual traffic nightmares on this route-- which are otherwise rare in Cleveland-- are likely to be persuasive.  This has become an us vs them issue driven by emotions.  That doesn't help our community, nor does it help the image of the urbanist movement in general. 

    So many false statements here....

    If the Shoreway boulevard conversion was approved tomorrow, we wouldn't see construction for another 3 years at the earliest.  Innerbelt will be wrapped up by then.  It takes that long to prepare biddable actual construction plans, put it out to bid, award contracts, etc.

    Us vs them?  Driven by emotion?  This project has been ranked as the #1 transportation priority behind the Innerbelt bridge by local business community. 

    doesn't help the image of the urbanist movement?  Please step down from your soapbox before you fall & hurt yourself...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on December 07, 2011, 08:15:02 PM

    Please step down from your soapbox before you fall & hurt yourself...
    :lol:
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 08, 2011, 12:04:14 AM
    Soap box?  I have three stacked up, and an impeccable sense of balance.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 08, 2011, 07:55:43 AM
    How much of the Shoreway project, in any form (whether still viable or dead) is "shovel ready?"

    It would seem to me that ODOT should at least have a plan for the W25th/W28th St ramps as they definitely qualify as a safety hazard.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: urbanlife on December 08, 2011, 08:56:59 AM
    How much of the Shoreway project, in any form (whether still viable or dead) is "shovel ready?"

    It would seem to me that ODOT should at least have a plan for the W25th/W28th St ramps as they definitely qualify as a safety hazard.

    ODOT and the city have a high level design for the entire project.  the estimates to complete that project (no traffic lights, pedestrian tunnels, a w73 tunnel, w25/28 reconfiguration, multipurpose path, and a tree lined median, again with no true intersections, just "right on, right off" ramps) are now $104 million.  The city has $49.8 million.

    So, the city started to phase this project even further, with these being the proposed phases:
    Phase I - 2 pedestrian tunnels (under construction, but facing serious delays), and the west 73 interchange, which has almost doubled in price;
    Phase II - rebuild entire roadway to make it "feel like a boulevard" even though there are no sidewalks, intersections, or multipurpose trails included.  This phase is estimated at around $35 million, and this is what the city recent submitted to the TRAC process for additional funding, which scored very low;
    Phase III - possibly something at w25/28, and the addition on multipurpose paths.  This phase in unfunded and the city isn't currently seeking funding for these elements.

    To my knowledge, nothing is shovel ready, with the most detailed (but not final) engineering work having been done on w73 interchange.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 08, 2011, 09:52:11 AM
    Thanks for that quick rundown urbanlife!

    Interesting that the ramp reconfiguration, which should be high on everyone's lists, don't even appear.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 08, 2011, 09:52:12 AM
    Even on the worst days, backups rarely extend west beyond Bunts Road because it provides spillover to 90.  So does 117th, but that's the last one till West Boulevard, which serves poorly as a cut-through.  So for all those claiming that these concerns carry no weight because they belong to people in Rocky River (really?), the brunt of this traffic problem would be felt in Edgewater, which is nominally within the city of Cleveland.  For Lakewood to be affected at all, Edgewater must first be slammed from end to end.  I really don't see this as a city vs suburb issue, and I really don't think we get far by stoking city vs suburb issues anyway.  Or Cleveland vs ODOT issues.

    Do you have traffic counts for Clifton/Shoreway?  I'd be interested to see how much traffic is gained at the Shoreway entrance from Lake Ave., Edgewater Dr., and West Blvd.

    I still can't imagine that traffic would stack through Edgewater due to lights beyond West Blvd.  If the Shoreway were converted to have traffic lights, that would have no effect on the current situation at West Blvd. and W. 117th unless traffic backed up from lights on the Shoreway (and I'd assume the first one would be W. 73rd in that scenario).  Also, since W. 73rd is not a major through route, there would be no need to have the light stay red for the Shoreway nearly as long as West Blvd. and W. 117th.  I just don't see the traffic backing up from that light (or any beyond it, especially if they're timed like the ones on Carnegie) all the way to West Blvd. or even to Lake Ave. (the distance from West Blvd. to W. 117th is about the same as from Lake Ave. and Clifton to W. 73rd.)

    Barring major traffic backups, the lights should be able to be timed so that even at its busiest time, 3 solid lanes of traffic can flow at 35 MPH without hitting a light all the way from West Blvd. to downtown for every time that light turns green, meaning the only effect on traffic would be the speed limit change, not the addition of traffic lights.  This is pretty much how Carnegie works.  Once you pass the MLK heading westbound in the morning, traffic does not stop until E. 55th Street, and often times not until E. 30th St., thanks to the timing of the lights.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 10, 2011, 12:21:07 PM
    This is somewhat related to the West Shoreway, but moreso to Edgewater Park, but I saw crews working along the Shoreway FINALLY cleaning up storm debris from last summer, putting up chain-link fences and other tidying up duties. They appeared to be state workers, but there were city crews working along the Shoeway the week before putting up snow fences.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 10, 2011, 01:35:59 PM
    So, the city started to phase this project even further, with these being the proposed phases:
    Phase I - 2 pedestrian tunnels (under construction, but facing serious delays), and the west 73 interchange, which has almost doubled in price;
    Phase II - rebuild entire roadway to make it "feel like a boulevard" even though there are no sidewalks, intersections, or multipurpose trails included.  This phase is estimated at around $35 million, and this is what the city recent submitted to the TRAC process for additional funding, which scored very low;
    Phase III - possibly something at w25/28, and the addition on multipurpose paths.  This phase in unfunded and the city isn't currently seeking funding for these elements.

    To my knowledge, nothing is shovel ready, with the most detailed (but not final) engineering work having been done on w73 interchange.

    Correct, nothing is shovel ready on this project and I think they are taking a much closer look at the railroad portion since they are having such a problem with soil conditions at the 76th tunnel. 

    ODOT needs to update the "fact sheet" for this project, because it's already out of date with what they published this summer.  The fact sheet they have posted on the project website indicates that 25th/28th work is part of Phase 1C.   http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/Documents/6.15.11%20Lakefront%20West%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf)

    I emailed the ODOT office back this summer for an update on the 73rd connection (when they announced it was being delayed another 2 years) and the response indicated there was ALOT of work to do with the railroad bridge, the mainline sewer relocation, and acquiring the property necessary to make this connection (some type of trucking/warehouse) at the corner of 73rd & Caruso.  I expect the price for this work will jump again because they just don't fully know what the work consists of yet.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 10, 2011, 01:46:25 PM
    $35 million to make it "feel like a boulevard" with no functional improvements?  Crazy.  Why not use that money on the multipurpose trail instead, so that pedestrians and cyclists can gain something from the expenditure?  How could the W25th ramp have no funding if $35 million is to be spent meaninglessly?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 11, 2011, 07:57:53 AM
    I'm sorry that you think improved pedestrian and bicycle access from the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood to this region's greatest natural asset is not a functional improvement. Furthermore development along a boulevard is more likely to happen than development along a highway designed similar to an interstate.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 12, 2011, 08:02:35 AM
    $35 million to make it "feel like a boulevard" with no functional improvements?  Crazy.  Why not use that money on the multipurpose trail instead, so that pedestrians and cyclists can gain something from the expenditure?  How could the W25th ramp have no funding if $35 million is to be spent meaninglessly?
    I actually have sympathy for this view.  Doing it not quite halfway, and then leaving it, is a worse option, in my opinion, than doing nothing.
    Now, if it was a step in a long range plan (with milestones and agreements from ODOT) then fine.

    What I want is the original version that ODOT grudingly agreed to under Mayor Campbell.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Ctownrocks1 on December 12, 2011, 11:59:16 AM
    Funding needed for redevelopment of downtown
    ODOT's advisory committee is considering proposal


    (Cleveland)- City of Cleveland officials are traveling to Columbus this week to help get funding for the West Shoreway project.

    Cleveland’s Chief Regional Development Director Chris Warren tells WTAM’S Bill Wills the Ohio Department of Transportation’s advisory committee is ranking competing proposals through the state and he wants to make sure Cleveland gets the additional funding.

    Up to $30 million is needed for the lakefront development to make traffic improvements, bicycle and a pedestrian trail to link Edgewater to downtown.

    Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson unveiled plan a few weeks ago for redevelopment of the lakefront downtown.

    "This plan will redefine Cleveland as a city that emanates from Lake Erie whether through commercial maritime activity and business opportunities or through public access for recreation and entertainment," says Jackson."We will transform Cleveland into a city connected to its lakefront all the opportunities and amenities it can afford."


    http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9499363 (http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9499363)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: urbanlife on December 13, 2011, 08:24:06 AM
    I'm sorry that you think improved pedestrian and bicycle access from the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood to this region's greatest natural asset is not a functional improvement. Furthermore development along a boulevard is more likely to happen than development along a highway designed similar to an interstate.

    Improved access would be an improvement, but the current TRAC application for phase II doesn't include any improved pedestrian access.  The only access improved is the pedestrian tunnels, currently under construction and unsuable for the 2d year, and the proposed interchange at w73 which is being funded out of the original 49.8 million grant from a few years ago.

    This project has shifted quite a bit, but if you review the most recent plans that the city is working from, there is no additional land that is opened up to development and the "boulevard" looks much like the existing highway - except that the whole thing is completely rebuilt with trees added down the middle.  There are no sidewalks added, no signalized intersections added, and no multi-purpose path added.  So, the $35 million funds only rebuilding the entire stretch of roadway to feel like a boulevard, without many of the critical elements that actually make it a boulevard - including opening additional land for development.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 13, 2011, 11:19:50 AM
    Funding needed for redevelopment of downtown
    ODOT's advisory committee is considering proposal


    (Cleveland)- City of Cleveland officials are traveling to Columbus this week to help get funding for the West Shoreway project.

    Cleveland’s Chief Regional Development Director Chris Warren tells WTAM’S Bill Wills the Ohio Department of Transportation’s advisory committee is ranking competing proposals through the state and he wants to make sure Cleveland gets the additional funding.

    Up to $30 million is needed for the lakefront development to make traffic improvements, bicycle and a pedestrian trail to link Edgewater to downtown.

    Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson unveiled plan a few weeks ago for redevelopment of the lakefront downtown.

    "This plan will redefine Cleveland as a city that emanates from Lake Erie whether through commercial maritime activity and business opportunities or through public access for recreation and entertainment," says Jackson."We will transform Cleveland into a city connected to its lakefront all the opportunities and amenities it can afford."


    http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9499363 (http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=122520&article=9499363)

    Good news.  I wonder what city "officials" are making the journey?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 13, 2011, 12:20:36 PM
    there is no additional land that is opened up to development...  There are no sidewalks added, no signalized intersections added, and no multi-purpose path added.

    And there never will be any of that so long as it stays a limited access 50 mph freeway...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 13, 2011, 12:40:08 PM
    there is no additional land that is opened up to development...  There are no sidewalks added, no signalized intersections added, and no multi-purpose path added.

    And there never will be any of that so long as it stays a limited access 50 mph freeway...

    I don't understand the obsession with development in a park area anyway.  The idea is to open up this great asset to the development that is already occurring nearby or is in the works in the neighborhoods adjoining the shoreway route.    This is Cleveland--a city with a continuing population decline and plenty of vacant/open space.   Just up the bluff there are plenty of vacant lots and abandoned warehouses ripe for development.   Conversion to a boulevard and improving access is about those places--not putting new commercial development inside Edgewater park.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: urbanlife on December 13, 2011, 12:50:32 PM
    there is no additional land that is opened up to development...  There are no sidewalks added, no signalized intersections added, and no multi-purpose path added.

    And there never will be any of that so long as it stays a limited access 50 mph freeway...

    yes, according to ODOT.   the thing is, there is nothing preventing ODOT and the city from making this a 35 mph roadway now - with no improvements whatsoever.  this would require legislative or ODOT policy change (depending on who you believe), but it is the same process that has to be followed after the boulevard is reconstructed. 

    i guess it is just a question of priorities, imo, with constrained budgets, you get the speed limit reduced now and build bicycle and pedestrian access first.  Otherwise bicycle and pedestrian access will become a phase iv part of the project, a project that started with just 1 phase.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: willyboy on December 13, 2011, 12:56:08 PM
    there is no additional land that is opened up to development...  There are no sidewalks added, no signalized intersections added, and no multi-purpose path added.

    And there never will be any of that so long as it stays a limited access 50 mph freeway...

    I don't understand the obsession with development in a park area anyway.  The idea is to open up this great asset to the development that is already occurring nearby or is in the works in the neighborhoods adjoining the shoreway route.    This is Cleveland--a city with a continuing population decline and plenty of vacant/open space.   Just up the bluff there are plenty of vacant lots and abandoned warehouses ripe for development.   Conversion to a boulevard and improving access is about those places--not putting new commercial development inside Edgewater park.

    Thank You!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 13, 2011, 01:33:37 PM
    A lot of the developments in the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood went in with the assumption that the boulevard would be constructed.  For instance, I know that Stone Mad set up shop on W. 65th because that would be one of the connector streets to the boulevard. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 14, 2011, 04:19:26 PM
    I don't think I've ever heard of such an effort in Cleveland to influence state officials regarding a transportation project. I think the last time I remember something like this was the fight over building the Clark Freeway through the Shaker Lakes.....

    http://tinyurl.com/7gvpsqb (http://tinyurl.com/7gvpsqb)

    Mayor Frank Jackson Will Send Off West Shoreway Advocates Traveling by Bus to Columbus for ODOT TRAC Hearing

    Representatives from Cleveland City Hall, Neighborhood Progress, Inc.,
    Bike Cleveland and City Neighborhoods will Depart at
    7:00am Thursday December 15, 2011


    CLEVELAND, OHIO -  Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson will be in attendance on Thursday morning to send off advocates of the Lakefront West Plan as they begin their journey to the state capital. The group making the trip is a broad coalition from the City of Clevleand, Bike Cleveland, three west side neighborhood community development organizations, and Neighborhood Progress, Inc. (NPI). Over 50 riders have reserved seats. They will be traveling to Columbus to show their support to the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and to encourage them to fund Phase II of the Lakefront West Project. Advocates will travel by bus and bicycle caravan to attend a hearing of the Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) at the ODOT Central Office (1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus OH 43233). 

    The second phase of the Lakefront West Plan includes improvements to the West Shoreway which currently exists as a barrier to Cleveland's prized asset, Lake Erie. Plans to reduce traffic to 35 miles per hour and create connections for pedestrians and cyclists have already prompted over $400 million in completed or planned economic development in the adjacent neighborhoods of Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway. Many future plans for development hinge on the completion of the Lakefront West Plan and ODOT's failure to fund the next phases will have a significant impact on the future of these Cleveland neighborhoods. "Neighborhood connections to our lakefront, traffic calming and new dedicated bikeways are critical to creating a new future for our city," says Bobbi Reichtell, Senior Vice President for Programs at Neighborhood Progress, Inc.

    NPI is joining with Bike Cleveland, The City of Cleveland and local community development organizations- Ohio City, Inc., Detroit Shoreway Community Development Organization and Cudell Improvement-  in support of this advocacy campaign.  Buses will depart from the Gordon Square Arts District parking lot at W. 61st and Detroit at 7:00 am on Thursday December 15. Attendees, media representatives and supporters are asked to gather at 6:30am.

    Though public comment is not allowed at TRAC hearings, the event will provide advocates with opportunities to interact with top city and state officials. State Senator Michael Skindell has agreed to meet with the group to hear their concerns. Ward 15 Councilman Matt Zone and Ward 16 Councilman Jay Westbrook will be in attendance. Several other City Hall staffers will be travelling by bus to the TRAC hearing including Chris Warren, Chief of Regional Development and Robert Brown, Director of Planning for the City of Cleveland.

    # # #
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 14, 2011, 05:44:28 PM
    I support this project 100% but can't believe that Cleveland leaders haven't done a better job stacking the deck on that TRAC board to get the funding pushed through...  there is nobody from the Cleveland area on it.  No wonder they didn't score the project highly...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 14, 2011, 06:05:17 PM
    What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.  As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.  I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 14, 2011, 06:28:30 PM
    ^The area around the entrance and exit ramps
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 14, 2011, 10:23:23 PM
    I support this project 100% but can't believe that Cleveland leaders haven't done a better job stacking the deck on that TRAC board to get the funding pushed through...  there is nobody from the Cleveland area on it.  No wonder they didn't score the project highly...

    Robert Clarke Brown, Treasurer for Case Western Reserve University, is on the TRAC board.


    What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.

    The flat land between the railroad, the Edgewater access ramps and the Shoreway curve (often called the Westinghouse Curve) has development proposed for it in the city's lakefront master plans which is what this highway project grew out of.

    Quote
    As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.

    What is an "expedient" road? If you mean a free-flowing, grade-separated road, Lakeshore Boulevard has seven at-grade intersections, six of them with stop lights. I lost count how many grade-separated pedestrian/bike crossings there were. More bike/ped crossings are probably the next-best option if we can't get an at-grade boulevard built here.

    Quote
    I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.

    You cannot use federal transportation dollars to pay for new office towers, apartment buildings etc. and you can't use state gas tax dollars for anything other than highways. I think we've been over this before a few times. And what part of using public investments in transportation to cause spin-off private investment have you not heard of before?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 15, 2011, 07:36:10 AM
    Lake Shore Drive varies between 35 and 45 MPH, and in the winter much of it maxes out at 40 MPH.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 15, 2011, 08:34:26 AM
    And Lake Shore Drive near Grant Park has traffic lights and intersections
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on December 15, 2011, 10:10:47 AM
    Cleveland backers of West Shoreway boulevard plan head to Columbus (video)
    Published: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 10:25 AM     Updated: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 11:32 AM
    Plain Dealer staff By Plain Dealer staff


    CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A contingent of Clevelanders boarded buses before dawn today to travel to Columbus in the hopes of convincing the Ohio Department of Transportation that plans to convert the West Shoreway to a boulevard should go forward.

    City leaders circulated petitions and organized the trip after ODOT staffers indicated it would be unlikely that the agency would free up the $28.2 million needed for the second phase of the project.

    The group was headed to a mid-morning meeting of an advisory body to ODOT that will issue a draft list of highway projects, by phases, to receive a chunk of $100 million over the next four years. The list will be finalized in March.

    http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/backers_of_west_shoreway_boule.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/backers_of_west_shoreway_boule.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on December 15, 2011, 10:12:35 AM
    City officials vow to press on with shoreway project despite ODOT obstructionism
    Thursday, December 08, 2011

    When Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) officials recently asked business leaders from across the state to rank their region's planned infrastructure projects by importance, the Greater Cleveland Partnership ranked the West Shoreway project as the number one priority for Northeast Ohio.

    For City of Cleveland Planning Director Bob Brown, that's one more reason why ODOT's numbers don't add up. The state agency gave the city 0 out of 10 points in the "economic development" category on its recent application for $28 million in additional funding to complete Phase II of the project.

    "States all across the country are beginning to think differently, and they're realizing that projects like this can actually improve their economic competitiveness," Brown said at a recent community meeting to discuss the project. The 10-year-old plan would transform the underutilized, 50s-style freeway into a landscaped boulevard with bicycle and pedestrian pathways. It would also offer residents and visitors improved access to Lake Erie.

    http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/devnews/westshorewayproject120811.aspx (http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/devnews/westshorewayproject120811.aspx)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 15, 2011, 10:26:34 AM
    What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.  As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.  I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.

    Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?   I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on December 15, 2011, 10:34:47 AM
    Frank Jackson is earning my respect more and more.

    It's obvious to everyone on this board that ODOT's methods are outdated and unsuited for urban development.

    The more we can get average people to understand this issue, the better.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 15, 2011, 10:50:44 AM
    Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?   I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.

    There are no West Shoreway-specific plans that involve building buildings. But the city's lakefront plans showed that new buildings (mostly lakefront housing) could be spurred by slowing down the Shoreway traffic and making it less of a physical barrier to Edgewater Park.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 15, 2011, 11:01:57 AM
    Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?   I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.

    There are no West Shoreway-specific plans that involve building buildings. But the city's lakefront plans showed that new buildings (mostly lakefront housing) could be spurred by slowing down the Shoreway traffic and making it less of a physical barrier to Edgewater Park.

    Right--spinoff development as a part of the master plan.  But nothing directly connected to the boulevard itself.

    I don't think you would find a person on this forum who does not want to see that kind development happen--but nothing is going to happen unless this project comes to fruition. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 15, 2011, 11:09:25 AM

    Right--spinoff development as a part of the master plan.  But nothing directly connected to the boulevard itself.

    Yes. Right. Correct-a-mundo! :)

    Frank Jackson is earning my respect more and more.

    It's obvious to everyone on this board that ODOT's methods are outdated and unsuited for urban development.

    The more we can get average people to understand this issue, the better.

    Trying to get the purveyors of pavement at ODOT to understand what the leaders of Ohio's urban areas are trying to do is like instigating a culture clash along the lines of Green Acres fame....

     1966 opening theme to Green Acres tv show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbk81X6WHA4#)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Boreal on December 15, 2011, 01:21:17 PM
    What could be done in the West Shoreway Conversion project to make Whiskey Island and Wendy Park more accessable?  As it is, one must drive the shoreway to the Edgewater Park exit, then creep along a twisting two lane road following an unattractive fence next to the railroad tracks.  That means that motoring is the *only* way in, unless you land on the catamaran beach.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 15, 2011, 01:23:35 PM
    There is a plan to use freed up land for developments.  Pictures are in this article from gcbl

    http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/citizens-guide-removing-highway (http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/citizens-guide-removing-highway)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 15, 2011, 04:01:46 PM
    Tom Patton is such a dick. Of course he comes across few constituents who favor the project. When do healthy, active urban cyclists ever have an occasion to encounter a suburban Jabba The Hut like him? And if I was Bob Bennett, I'd smack Patton with a bear claw to get his attention. Extra sweet.

    Cleveland officials are encouraged about future of West Shoreway project after meeting with ODOT officials
    Published: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 5:00 PM     Updated: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 5:08 PM
      By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

    COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A concerted, grass roots push to land more money for the West Shoreway project has clearly caught the ear of state transportation officials.

    Whether that means the city will land some or all of the $28.2 million it seeks to convert the 55 mph shoreway to a 35 mph boulevard remains to be seen.

    But Jerry Wray, director of the Ohio Department of Transporation,  told a busload of city officials, residents and bicycling advocates who traveled to Columbus Thursday that they should keep their voices raised.

    READ MORE AT:
    http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/cleveland_officials_are_encour.html (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/cleveland_officials_are_encour.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Boreal on December 15, 2011, 06:31:11 PM
    I used to see Bennet's sailboat at Edgewater Yacht Club.  He may have only been visiting.  He probably docks at a silver service club like Cleveland Yacht Club:

    Robert Bennett, former chairman of the state Republican party, said he's talked with Wray. He lives on Edgewater Drive in Cleveland and supports the project. "I think there's a willingness on the part of the governor and (ODOT) director to attempt to bring it to a conclusion."
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 15, 2011, 06:37:17 PM
    I actually had an hour long phone conversation with Sen Patton about the Shoreway project last year.  He said he'd support it if mayors of his district wrote letters of support for it.  He said he grew up in the West side neighborhood near the Shoreway and knows how important it is, but also said Cleveland hasn't done a good job of getting the project accomplished.  Only now it seems they are rallying support and getting on the same page.  Last year Frank Jackson barely supported the project and couldn't be bothered to call state leaders when a vote was in the state house to lower the speed limit, the first step to the boulevard conversion.

    Also, I think Robert Clark Brown was removed from the TRAC board for not attending meetings.  He's not listed on the website here either.  http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Pages/Meet%20theTRAC.aspx (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Pages/Meet%20theTRAC.aspx)  Sure hope they get him replaced with someone from the Cleveland area. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 15, 2011, 08:08:16 PM
    More bike/ped crossings are probably the next-best option if we can't get an at-grade boulevard built here.
    ***
    You cannot use federal transportation dollars to pay for new office towers, apartment buildings etc. and you can't use state gas tax dollars for anything other than highways. I think we've been over this before a few times. And what part of using public investments in transportation to cause spin-off private investment have you not heard of before?

    Pedestrian and bike bridges do seem like a way to help those constituencies, without taking anything from those who prefer the roadway remain as it is.  The continued dismissal of that point of view has been noted by many people, people whose support may one day be needed. 

    As to the money, yes, we both know that.  So spend the transport money on improving transport, while using other monies to stimulate development more directly.  I don't get how suddenly the boulevard conversion was never intended to stimulate nearby development.  Up till now that's been one of the main points of it.  If it's only about "access" to the lake... you've got to be kidding me.  That does not require disregarding thousands of commuters, an aspect of this which increasingly comes off as gratuitous and spiteful.  That takes us back to where we started, with less intrusive alternatives like bridges providing "access" equal to or better than at-grade crosswalks. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 16, 2011, 07:19:16 AM
    I don't get how suddenly the boulevard conversion was never intended to stimulate nearby development.  Up till now that's been one of the main points of it.  If it's only about "access" to the lake... you've got to be kidding me. 

    OK, how are you coming to that conclusion? Perhaps a good reason for the dismissal of commuters' arguments like yours is because come from far left field.

    And it's not dismissal of the commuters' argument. If possession is 9/10 of the law, I'd say the people who live in Cleveland and want better access to a lakefront park in their neighborhood have a stronger position to argue than those who merely pass through their neighborhood on the way to work.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ss14 on December 16, 2011, 08:54:06 AM
    327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

    Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.






    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 16, 2011, 09:08:54 AM
    All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

    If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on December 16, 2011, 09:09:08 AM
    327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

    Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.


    Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 16, 2011, 09:22:04 AM
    I know it's not scientific, but...

    Random Google Street View of Shoreway:

    http://g.co/maps/6hm9h (http://g.co/maps/6hm9h)

    Random Goolge Street View of Lake Shore Drive:

    http://g.co/maps/ac763 (http://g.co/maps/ac763)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ss14 on December 16, 2011, 09:35:54 AM
    327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

    Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.


    Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.

    You are correct, Lake Shore Drive has much more traffic at off-peak hours than the West Shoreway.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Matches on December 16, 2011, 09:39:16 AM
    What could be done in the West Shoreway Conversion project to make Whiskey Island and Wendy Park more accessable?  As it is, one must drive the shoreway to the Edgewater Park exit, then creep along a twisting two lane road following an unattractive fence next to the railroad tracks.  That means that motoring is the *only* way in, unless you land on the catamaran beach.

    There are plans unrelated to this project for a pedestrian bridge in the west bank of the Flats to connect directly to Whiskey Island.  People jog and bike that two-lane road quite a bit to get to and from, but it's true that you have to access it from Edgewater.  It ain't an actual island but it is about as isolated as it could be, but that's as much about about both river and rail than it is about the Shoreway.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ss14 on December 16, 2011, 09:39:58 AM
    All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

    If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...

    Montrose Harbor, Belmont Harbor, North Avenue Beach -- I don't see any functional difference between those areas and Edgewater.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 16, 2011, 10:09:37 AM
    327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

    Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.


    Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.

    Dead on surfohio!

    This is about the future of OUR lakefront, not what the Shoreway was 40 years ago.  As someone previously stated the daily use totals are down to 30,000 vehicles.   This short stretch of highway needs to be updated for the next 50 years of Cleveland's existence.   That status quo that benefits 30,000 people from Rocky River and Lakewood to save 5 minutes on their commute will not really make much of difference in their lives.   Are all 30,000 of them going to move somewhere else?  And if they chose to do so, where are they going to move?  Further out that requires them to use I90?   Where is the logic in that?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 16, 2011, 10:28:51 AM
    Even if the Shoreway was not touched, I-90 is likely to become the better commute pattern into downtown with the new innerbelt bridge since it should alleviate alot of the backup occurring at the 71 merge/490 split.  I'd venture the traffic counts on the Shoreway will drop even more.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 16, 2011, 11:14:35 AM
    I know it's not scientific, but...

    Random Google Street View of Shoreway:

    http://g.co/maps/6hm9h (http://g.co/maps/6hm9h)



    Random Goolge Street View of Lake Shore Drive:

    http://g.co/maps/ac763 (http://g.co/maps/ac763)

    If you turn the Lakeshore drive pic 180 degrees backwards you see......A traffic light and an intersection
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 16, 2011, 11:52:41 AM
    That's the first traffic light when you're heading southbound (the northernmost light), so it has no bearing on the southbound traffic volume at that point yet although the northbound traffic (direction the Google vehicle is moving would be affected).  If you move the Street View through those few intersections, you see that none of them causes these catastrophic backups people are fearing, even when the controlled access portions have far more traffic than the Shoreway.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 16, 2011, 11:59:32 AM
    Are all 30,000 of them going to move somewhere else?  And if they chose to do so, where are they going to move?  Further out that requires them to use I90?   Where is the logic in that?

    Never doubt the level of irrational thinking some suburbanites are capable of.

    I know many people that would rather commute 30 minutes on a freeway than 15 minutes on a road with traffic lights.  I don't understand it.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on December 16, 2011, 12:02:04 PM
    This is far from any intersection.

    http://g.co/maps/zzfqz (http://g.co/maps/zzfqz)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 16, 2011, 01:02:40 PM
    All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

    If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...

    Montrose Harbor, Belmont Harbor, North Avenue Beach -- I don't see any functional difference between those areas and Edgewater.

    Montrose area has 6 pedestrian connections to an area that is significantly smaller than Edgewater which has 4: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake (closed), 76th (closed) and 65th.   Belmont & North Ave Beach combined aren't even a sliver of Edgewater's area.  And they both have several access points for pedestrians.

    Also worth noting that Lake Shore Drive is 4 lanes both directions and fronts some of the most expensive real estate in America.  A tunnel project would be nearly impossible here.  Cleveland's Shoreway is 3 lanes in each direction, carries a fraction of the traffic and fronts vacant obsolete warehouses...   but hey you said they're essentially the same so whatever

    Edit: it's over 1.5 miles between the two entrances to Edgewater Park right now: West Blvd & 65th.  Keep the comparisons to Chicago coming, it only justifies the need for this project even more...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: metrocity on December 16, 2011, 01:23:35 PM
    "The Campaign for a Free and Clear Lakefront is a grassroots coalition to remove Lakeshore Drive from Grant Park, and eventually the entire Chicago shoreline."

    http://foreverfreeandclear.org/ (http://foreverfreeandclear.org/)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ss14 on December 16, 2011, 01:35:39 PM

    Montrose area has 6 pedestrian connections to an area that is significantly smaller than Edgewater which has 4: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake (closed), 76th (closed) and 65th.   Belmont & North Ave Beach combined aren't even a sliver of Edgewater's area.  And they both have several access points for pedestrians.

    Also worth noting that Lake Shore Drive is 4 lanes both directions and fronts some of the most expensive real estate in America.  A tunnel project would be nearly impossible here.  Cleveland's Shoreway is 3 lanes in each direction, carries a fraction of the traffic and fronts vacant obsolete warehouses...   but hey you said they're essentially the same so whatever

    Edit: it's over 1.5 miles between the two entrances to Edgewater Park right now: West Blvd & 65th.  Keep the comparisons to Chicago coming, it only justifies the need for this project even more...

    Why would a couple pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway not solve the problem of pedestrian access, whatever the size of the park?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 16, 2011, 01:46:51 PM
    Why would a couple pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway not solve the problem of pedestrian access, whatever the size of the park?

    Why do shopping malls have more entrances than little stores?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 16, 2011, 01:49:37 PM
    You tell me -  where would you locate the pedestrian bridges?  Over the norfolk southern railroad tracks too?  or under the tracks, then over the shoreway?  The RR tracks are a bigger obstacle than the Shoreway...

    I think the current design is perfectly adequate, with the following improvements

    1. Reconfigured intersection at Lake & West Blvd - current setup is a beotch to get across on foot or bike

    2. Upgraded tunnel at Lake/Clifton - in progress but not complete

    3. Upgraded tunnel at 76th - in progress but not complete

    4. New access point at 73rd for cars & pedestrians - will not interfere with Shoreway traffic but will tie into Edgewater on/off ramps

    5.  Refigured intersection at 25th/28th is a main priority from a safety standpoint but has nothing to do with park access.

    Slowing the Shoreway down is essential to adding the bike path.  I think this point is getting lost in the discussion.  If the traffic isn't slowed, you'd need a retaining wall or something to protect pedestrians on the nearby path or move it significantly far off the route which adds cost.  Slowing the Shoreway down to 35 allows the path to be located closer by the roadway and saves money.  See the cross sections on the ODOT plan for how this would work.

    If the Shoreway isn't slowed down, the bike path is a non-issue.  Access points which I mentioned above are unrelated to traffic speed.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ss14 on December 16, 2011, 02:11:32 PM
    You guys might be changing my mind a bit. I'm going to read more on the plan. Have a good Friday.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 16, 2011, 08:01:46 PM
    You guys might be changing my mind a bit. I'm going to read more on the plan. Have a good Friday.

    Come along and help us make this happen! :)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 17, 2011, 09:27:08 AM
    One thing not being considered in these comparisons is that Cleveland's densest housing area is 5 miles west of center, and Lakewood is more dense overall than anything between it and downtown, including Battery Park.  Why things ended up like that I'll never know.  But that's why there are 2 highways for the west shore, and that's why the shoreway's traffic is so concentrated into rush hour. 

    Keep in mind that reduced shoreway traffic in recent decades coincided with reduced jobs and retail downtown, which is not the current trend or goal.  For those suggesting that 90 will absorb the shoreway's volume, consider that W117th already backs up from 90 to Madison at times.  Too much stoppage added for that 1-entrance Target complex. 

    The people who oppose (only certain aspects of) this aren't doing so because they're against progress, and painting that picture is just not helpful at all.  The arguments against bridges here aren't particularly strong-- yes they should probably span the tracks too, and no there doesn't need to be one for every block-- so I don't advise cutting off consideration of alternatives quite yet.  If there's a way for everyone to win, shouldn't that be the goal?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on December 17, 2011, 04:45:03 PM
    I don't think I-90 needs to absorb any traffic at all.  I think that the Shoreway can handle all of the traffic it currently does at rush hour with a 35 MPH speed limit and a few well-timed traffic lights.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: MuRrAy HiLL on December 21, 2011, 05:31:44 PM
    More talk:

    http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628 (http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 22, 2011, 07:03:53 AM
    The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?   How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation? 

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Hts121 on December 22, 2011, 11:49:57 AM
    What would be more expensive (and potentially cost-prohibitive) - ped bridgers or tunnels?  Personally, I see about even advantages to both so I would go with the more economically feasible plan.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 22, 2011, 12:11:50 PM
    The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?   How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation?

    The same way Ohio's largest cities have let state government (both parties) ignore all of the state's urban needs for 40+ years. What can Cleveland do about it? Withhold state tax revenues? Threaten to secede? Go to war?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 22, 2011, 12:45:27 PM
    The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?   How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation?

    The same way Ohio's largest cities have let state government (both parties) ignore all of the state's urban needs for 40+ years. What can Cleveland do about it? Withhold state tax revenues? Threaten to secede? Go to war?


    The Sovereign Nation of Cuyahoga.   It has a ring to it.   Plus we can add four more casinos, along with cheap gas and smokes! ;) 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 22, 2011, 01:38:44 PM
    More talk:

    http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628 (http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628)

    I was interviewed for that article but my quotes didn't make it into print.  I know several others who were interviewed who's comments weren't included.  It's a shame too, I had high expectations when the author told me what she had planned for the article.  Instead it's not much of anything except restating what's been written in the PD.

    In terms of tunnels or bridges, I didn't think the pedestrian bridge over the active railroad tracks was a good idea, but a quick google search shows alot of instances where it seems to.  Much less maintenance and probably safer than a tunnel too, except I hate the idea of having an elevator involved...

    I don't see a need for any new intersections so long as the one at 73rd gets installed as planned.  That's 5 access points to Edgewater along 1.5 miles: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake tunnel, 76th tunnel, 73rd tunnel, & 65th tunnel.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on December 22, 2011, 02:18:35 PM
    Have you ever seen one person crossing over the pedestrian bridge in Gordon Park over the East Shoreway?

    Its not just about pedestrian access, it about integrating the city grid up to the shoreline park
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on December 22, 2011, 02:47:15 PM
    Understood, but the railroad tracks are a bigger obstacle than the Shoreway, at least for the majority of the park from Clifton/Lake all the way to Westinghouse curve... 

    On second thought, the Gordon Park bridge is a poor analogy.  There's nothing to connect to.  What's on the north side, some parking lots?  A handful of boat docks?  No beach, no playground, no concessions stands, no ball fields, no walking path...  all that bridge really does is connect some overflow parking
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jmjr on December 23, 2011, 04:19:59 AM
    Traffic flow will always be an issue on a major commuter route... and barring substantial transit expansion, this will always be a major commuter route.  Why is it so important to put bikes in the same space as cars instead of adding a multipurpose path?  Why is it so important to "access the lake" via crosswalks instead of the tunnels we're already spending so much to renovate?  It seems like beneficial compromises are available here.  I strongly suggest we don't declare war on ODOT over this.  Also please keep in mind that there are adverse local interests as well, before you purport to speak for the entire community.

    A lot of people living west of the shoreway do not want a boulevard conversion.  It is absolutely unfair for their interests to be disregarded to the extent we're reaching here.  This is not a Cleveland city street... it's a state highway and two federal highways combined.  It belongs to everyone.  It belongs to people in Westlake and Peoria too.  ODOT is not trying to halt progress, prevent cycling, isolate Lake Erie, or impinge upon Battery Park.  Claiming that they are sounds childish.  Refusing to compromise with your neighbors doesn't sound too cool either.  Surely we can work this out.       

    With that in mind then perhaps the funding should be used to expand Route 2 and four lanes of higher speed traffic right through all the homes along Edgewater and The Gold Coast. Bulldoze the high rises and lake front homes so that the all important major traffic route be preserved. After all I-90 is so far away and the millions of dollars being spent on the bridges surely won't satisfy the masses.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jmjr on December 23, 2011, 04:39:26 AM
    327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

    Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.

    It's not just about lake front access it I about the development of and connecting of neighborhoods within the city.






    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 23, 2011, 07:23:48 AM
           


    With that in mind then perhaps the funding should be used to expand Route 2 and four lanes of higher speed traffic right through all the homes along Edgewater and The Gold Coast. Bulldoze the high rises and lake front homes so that the all important major traffic route be preserved. After all I-90 is so far away and the millions of dollars being spent on the bridges surely won't satisfy the masses.

    Haha--I have thrown out similar ideas on other forums to get the same point across. 

    OK Lakewood and Rocky River commuters, if you are worried about the last three minutes of your commute, how about we blow a 6 lane highway right through Lakewood and Rocky River to speed things up.  In fact, why don't we connect it all the way out to Westlake so I can get from my house in Cleveland to the new center of commerce at Crocker Park.   Why should I be inconvenienced?   And plus, it will help you having a 6 lane freeway right through YOUR town!

    They never seem to have a response for that.... ;)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on December 23, 2011, 03:55:01 PM
    That argument isn't as strong as you're making it out to be.  Clifton is fronted by residential, while the shoreway portion is fronted by parks and heavy industry.  They aren't fungible.  Also, it's rational for commuter roads to be wider and faster near downtown, because traffic increases as you approach there and decreases as you get further out.  This phenomenon is observable and predictable.  Not just here but everywhere. 

    The current arrangement makes logical sense, which is why it's there in the first place.  This brings us to the other problem.  A new freeway along Clifton isn't needed, it's desired by no one and would rightly be seen as a waste of money.  Lots of expense for minimal gain... which mirrors the concerns that many have about the boulevard conversion project.  Independent of the traffic issue is a less than favorable cost-benefit equation, during a period of relative scarcity.  Why couldn't we have sent buses of protestors to Cbus to ask for better mass transit funding instead?  Surely that irony is apparent.   
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on December 23, 2011, 04:04:47 PM
    That argument isn't as strong as you're making it out to be.  Clifton is fronted by residential, while the shoreway portion is fronted by parks and heavy industry.  They aren't fungible.  Also, it's rational for commuter roads to be wider and faster near downtown, because traffic increases as you approach there and decreases as you get further out.  This phenomenon is observable and predictable.  Not just here but everywhere. 

    The current arrangement makes logical sense, which is why it's there in the first place.  This brings us to the other problem.  A new freeway along Clifton isn't needed, it's desired by no one and would rightly be seen as a waste of money.  Lots of expense for minimal gain... which mirrors the concerns that many have about the boulevard conversion project.  Independent of the traffic issue is a less than favorable cost-benefit equation, during a period of relative scarcity.  Why couldn't we have sent buses of protestors to Cbus to ask for better mass transit funding instead?  Surely that irony is apparent.   

    Agreed and I present it to them in those absurd terms to make the same point about the Shoreway.  It was designed for their parents to make the commute with double the traffic.  Today there are fewer than 30,000 cars a day using the route.   Why not tone it down for the good of the residents old and new who are trying to forge a neighborhood for the new century?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jmjr on December 23, 2011, 07:25:24 PM
    And as we look at that new century let's keep in mind that advances in technology make telecommuting a reasonable alternative for many jobs.  This too can and will decrease the number of people who need to utilize any roadway.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on December 23, 2011, 10:11:00 PM
    OK, why did residential grow up along Clifton? Because it was a low-speed road that was served by high-quality transit to downtown. It wasn't a very quick route road cars or streetcars/buses, as cars took the limited-access Bulkley Boulevard past Edgewater Park and then funneled into Detroit Avenue to crawl across the congested Detroit-Superior Bridge. Streetcars took an even slower route -- east on Clifton, then to Lake, then on Detroit. They didn't descend into the subway until West 28th.

    Why are there parks and industry along the Shoreway? Because the Shoreway came last. It was built as a high-speed roadway atop Bulkley Boulevard that was a boulevard in name only through Edgewater Park and past the industries served by the New York Central RR on the bluff.

    Turn the Shoreway into a low-speed road with intersections, transit stops (as originally planned) and biking/hiking paths, and you've created conditions favorable for residential to appear here, as it did along Clifton. The City of Cleveland's planners understand this very well. I don't understand why you're having such difficulty with this, 327. Perhaps it's because you're seeing this only from your perspective as a commuter?

    BTW, I'm also a Lakewood-to-downtown commuter. Every good thing has a price, and I think adding a few minutes to my commute to promote development along my route is a price worth paying.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on January 19, 2012, 08:37:29 AM
    CLEVELAND, Ohio --
    ODOT has earned a second heaping of scorn from Cleveland City Hall, this time over money delays for the West Shoreway project.

    The Ohio Department of Transportation set off a tempest earlier this week with news that money for a second Inner Belt Bridge might not be available for 11 years.
    Outrage burned anew after city officials realized that $30 million for converting the West Shoreway into a boulevard also was put on hold for more than a decade.

    It's part of $50.2 million that City Hall officials, Mayor Frank Jackson included, believe ODOT had promised and would make available for the project's first phase.
    Jackson said Wednesday that ODOT was "disingenuous" for working with the city recently to find money for a second phase of the project, but not telling officials that money to complete the first phase might not be available until 2026.



    full story:  http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2012/01/anger_in_cleveland_city_hall_b.html#incart_hbx (http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2012/01/anger_in_cleveland_city_hall_b.html#incart_hbx)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on January 19, 2012, 12:22:19 PM
    This project is quickly becoming a fading glimmer of hope.  Zone's comments about it killing Battery Park are ridiculous - vast majority of residents buy without any knowledge of the Shoreway or the planned connection at 73rd so they won't even miss it not being built.   The mayor and councilman's plan for another bustrip to Columbus is silly too, who has time for all this
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on January 19, 2012, 01:11:41 PM
    I'm sure ODOT will take their $100 Million and build plenty more sound walls, freeway information signs (completely inane and useless) and beautification projects in Columbus.   
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on January 19, 2012, 02:06:23 PM
    yeah columbus is awful.  I believe Zone made that statement to try to put a dramatic spin on the situation and try to emphasize the need for the project.  I sure as heck didnt buy there because of that project and Im still on the fence if i support the project or not.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on January 20, 2012, 11:29:00 AM
    This project is quickly becoming a fading glimmer of hope.  Zone's comments about it killing Battery Park are ridiculous - vast majority of residents buy without any knowledge of the Shoreway or the planned connection at 73rd so they won't even miss it not being built.   The mayor and councilman's plan for another bustrip to Columbus is silly too, who has time for all this

    the project will be completed, mark my words.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on January 23, 2012, 06:23:26 AM
    Anyone who says a successful housing development is suddenly threatened by road conditions that have existed all along should not be leading bus trips to ODOT.  They shouldn't even be talking to ODOT, because it does not make us sound particularly thoughtful. 

    I still maintain that the best way to use 50 million in furtherance of residential is to spend it on residential.  And that transportation funds should be used to increase transportation, not to reduce it.  So adding a rail line, or at least talking about it, might make this idea more palatable.  West Shore Commuter Rail should be an integral part of the plan.  That way, neighbors who need to get to work aren't made out to be enemies of Battery Park.  That way the project adds value for everyone, rather than transferring benefit from Peter to Paul.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on January 23, 2012, 09:31:07 AM
    Anyone who says a successful housing development is suddenly threatened by road conditions that have existed all along should not be leading bus trips to ODOT.  They shouldn't even be talking to ODOT, because it does not make us sound particularly thoughtful. 

    I still maintain that the best way to use 50 million in furtherance of residential is to spend it on residential.  And that transportation funds should be used to increase transportation, not to reduce it.  So adding a rail line, or at least talking about it, might make this idea more palatable.  West Shore Commuter Rail should be an integral part of the plan.  That way, neighbors who need to get to work aren't made out to be enemies of Battery Park.  That way the project adds value for everyone, rather than transferring benefit from Peter to Paul.

    Good idea--but we know what 50 million in rail gets us....you'll have more people angry they have no way to get to work then reducing the speed on the shoreway by 15 mph. 

    This project is about connection--which is something Cleveland has NEVER been able to pull off.   Look how long it's taken the investment pioneers in Ohio City to connect to those in Detroit Shoreway.   Right--it's not happened, and won't in the next 100 years unless we continue to work to connect the neighborhoods in a meaningful way.  Until then Cleveland will brag about it's "islands" of urban renewal, much like we were doing in 1992.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Htsguy on January 23, 2012, 09:36:29 AM
    ^excellent points
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on January 23, 2012, 10:39:26 AM
    I still maintain that the best way to use 50 million in furtherance of residential is to spend it on residential. 

    Just curious, do you think the money spent on Gordon Square's streetscape was a good investment?

    But anyhow, residential is huge, but not the only goal behind the Shoreway conversion.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on January 23, 2012, 03:40:47 PM
    Just curious, do you think the money spent on Gordon Square's streetscape was a good investment?

    Yes and no.  Mostly no.  The bus shelters are downright embarrassing.  The lighting is nice though, and was sorely needed.  Generally I prefer more direct investments in the built environment, rather than continually "enhancing" public goods to the Nth degree. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on January 23, 2012, 03:42:03 PM
    Just curious, do you think the money spent on Gordon Square's streetscape was a good investment?

    Yes and no.  Mostly no.  The bus shelters are downright embarrassing.  The lighting is nice though, and was sorely needed.  Generally I prefer more direct investments in the built environment, rather than continually "enhancing" public goods to the Nth degree. 

    Gotcha.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on January 23, 2012, 07:18:44 PM
    I would rather see public funding go to making difficult "soil" for housing more fertile than buying more housing to plant in that unimproved soil.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on January 23, 2012, 08:00:42 PM
    Sticking with the metaphor, I guess I see a lot of available land in Cleveland as crop-ready, and I question the extent to which crosswalk decorations provide much in the way of fertilizer. 

    Similarly it seems to me that this proposal invests quite a lot into creating access for a massive body of water that isn't exactly walled off to begin with, while adding a relatively small amount of developable land to an already substantial pool of it.  Using terms familiar to the commuting angle, how many minutes is this going to shave off the trip from Battery Park to Edgewater Park?  At a rate of how many dollars per minute?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on January 23, 2012, 09:18:22 PM
    Everyone who's an opponent of the Shoreway project loves to paint it as a simple time saver for BP residents.  I guess proponents of the project haven't done a good enough job selling the many merits of it, because that perception remains.  BP residents already bought back there and the vast majority did so with no knowledge of the 73rd interchage or the Shoreway project whatsoever.  If the 73rd interchange was open tomorrow, it wouldn't increase sales in BP overnight and wouldn't really improve resale values either.  Get to know people and the area & you'll realize this.

    The connection is for the existing side streets which are now getting pounded with traffic, coming & going to the businesses in Gordon Square & BP.  Ask Jeff Ramsey, the head of DSCDO for his thoughts on how the 73rd connection is needed to benefit the businesses of the area.  Ask old time residents what the traffic on 76th/74th/73rd is like on a volleyball night or Friday after work when everyone is headed to the area for a drink.  I don't think any of them give 2 shits about BP resident's commute times.  Or ask someone who lives there now, longterm or otherwise, how stupid it is to walk 1+ miles or drive 2+ miles to get to the park which you can throw a stone into.

    327 - I get that you're no fan of the project and I won't convince you, but your criticism of the Gordon Square streetscape seems especially odd.  This was a much needed investment that had huge returns for the area.  Go back & see the before & after photos and see how many businesses have opened since the project finished.  If there was ever a slam dunk successful project, that was it.  Lighting & landscaping & benches were added, the bus shelters (somewhat hideous) are actually public art, the sidewalk was widened, the hundreds of overhead wires were buried.  Ask some of the new business owners if they ever considered opening before the project or what benefit they think it had on the area.  Regardless, this thread is waaay off topic now as half my post is related to Detroit Shoreway/Gordon Square. 

    But since we're on the topic, you should volunteer as a Neighborhood Ambassador for the area on a weekend evening and talk to the many visitors who come in from surrounding areas.  Ask them how it was driving there from the East side, and ask them if they had any trouble finding the place.  Ask them if they'd be more inclined to come into the area if there was an interchange at the Shoreway & 73rd...   it's easy to dismiss these people as "typical scared suburbanites" but reality is that these people are looking for an urban experience and the area needs them to continue coming to visit.  These people will only do so as long as they feel safe & comfortable.  Easy driving access, well lit streets, nice sidewalks, and parking close by are all part of the equation. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 327 on January 24, 2012, 05:02:02 AM
    Gordon Square was developing rapidly long before the streetscape project began.  As for the 73rd interchange, I agree it's needed.  I also agree that well lit streets, nice sidewalks, and nearby parking are all helpful.  But including this one, I have yet to see a streetscape project so focused.  I find it comical that the sidewalks and crosswalks exhibit such elaborate pizazz where so many buildings are in shambles within a few blocks.  It's like visitors are only expected to walk on the yellow brick road.  Horse first, then cart. 

    Last year I saw an apartment on Detroit, right by the streetscape area, where the entire ceiling had collapsed into the bedroom and was strewn about the floor.  They're like, yeah we'll clean that up.  I'm like, why would you even show this?  D-S needs to get its apartment stock up to first world conditions, then worry about what sort of abstract meaning is conveyed by the bus stops.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on January 24, 2012, 08:49:51 AM

      D-S needs to get its apartment stock up to first world conditions, then worry about what sort of abstract meaning is conveyed by the bus stops.

    Cleveland housing code enforcement is another big contributor to my aforementioned "Islands" of development in Cleveland.   As soon as a couple pioneers move in the ghetto landlords want $350K for their run down building or house next door.     Start enforcing the codes on them or make them sell to someone who will put money in their property.   

    This for another thread....
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on February 13, 2012, 08:34:59 AM
    Anyone driving the West Shoreway this morning could see that lowering the speed limit is not a bad idea.   Quite a nice multi-vehicle wreck that had things backed up for miles.   The road was simply not designed for today's commuters doing 70 MPH with a phone in one hand and Starbucks in the other!  ;)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on February 13, 2012, 03:21:55 PM
    I have a Shoreway observation to consider. For nearly a month, a car bumper has been laying on the shoulder before the Westbound entrance to _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Park. This is nothing new, trash and refuse accumulate there because the nearby environment is inhospitable.

    Now this area is our doorstep to the lake, it's prized real estate that's treated like hell! And it should be treated better. For the life of me I cannot imagine how we can tap the potential here without calming the shoreway.

    It should and can be a place where drivers, pedestrians and cyclists have the option to slow down and enjoy the area. Just like Lake Ave. Just like Clifton. Then when people can experience more personal access, then there will be stakeholders who care about things like car parts laying there for a month.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on February 13, 2012, 04:01:57 PM
    Good subject for the Edgewater Park thread. Keep this thread for the highway (re)construction project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on February 13, 2012, 04:15:23 PM
    Drat. Maybe I wasn't clear enough on the point I wanted to make.

    I'm not talking about the potential of Edewater, but how the Shoreway conversion is needed to transform the roadside into something far better.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on February 13, 2012, 04:43:22 PM
    Look closely and you'll see the rotting remains of 3 light poles laying in the weeds along the railroad tracks, just east of Don's Lighthouse....  they blew down and snapped off last summer.  Road crews just drug em off into the grass & they've been there ever since.  It's really not a problem because they rarely mow and when they do, they just mow around em ;-)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on February 13, 2012, 06:41:41 PM
    Drat. Maybe I wasn't clear enough on the point I wanted to make.

    I'm not talking about the potential of Edewater, but how the Shoreway conversion is needed to transform the roadside into something far better.

    Well at least you were creative in your attempt to make it seem like you were on topic.

    Gottaplan, are you taking notes? ;-)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on February 13, 2012, 06:52:53 PM
    Anyone driving the West Shoreway this morning could see that lowering the speed limit is not a bad idea.   Quite a nice multi-vehicle wreck that had things backed up for miles.   The road was simply not designed for today's commuters doing 70 MPH with a phone in one hand and Starbucks in the other!  ;)

    Yeah. This needs to be addressed ASAP. There has been a wreck(s) at this spot almost every week now. You can basically count on a back up at least once a week down Clifton. Traffic on the West Shoreway has grown leaps and bounds this year as an alternative to the innerbelt and its various construction tie ups so it's no surprise the number of accidents has jumped. This particular spot is always bad because the second you round that curve you hit major sun glare. It is also at the lowest elevation point for that stretch of road so it accumulates water and subsequently more likely to frost up which is never a good combination with a curve.

    There really is no short term solution other than putting up a caution 35 mph before that curve ... which in my opinion would do more harm as you'd have half the traffic slowing down to 35 and the other half changing lanes while going 60 to get around them, which would probably amount to more wrecks.

    Of course, the ideal solution is traffic calming via actual intersections ... maybe that's for 2019 if ever. I would say, though, that if they ever went through with the actual conversion, the traffic on the shoreway would plummet to just those who live north of Detroit. I am amazed at the number of cars driving the shoreway that DO NOT exit at either Lakeside or East 9th for Downtown destinations. It seems that more than half of all cars driving eastbound on the Shoreway continue to the I-90 merge going east.

    The same is true for the evening westbound rush. With deadman's curve backing up daily, there are more cars coming from I-90 at 5 pm going west than those getting on from downtown destinations. It becomes apparent when you see just how many cars turn down West Blvd and 117th to reconnect to I-90. I would love to see a study of the percentage of total cars that drive the shoreway between 4 and 6 pm that actually make it past 117th on Clifton ... it must only be a fraction.

    It would be nice to see this project go through, just to get rid of all the extraneous cross county traffic that uses this as a short cut. I'm sick and tired of hearing all the complaints about this being a "Lakewood to Downtown Cleveland" commute issue, when it's more of a Lorain County/Westlake trying to get to MLK/I-90/I-271 shortcut issue.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on February 14, 2012, 05:54:54 PM
    Drat. Maybe I wasn't clear enough on the point I wanted to make.

    I'm not talking about the potential of Edewater, but how the Shoreway conversion is needed to transform the roadside into something far better.

    Well at least you were creative in your attempt to make it seem like you were on topic.

    Gottaplan, are you taking notes? ;-)

    An off-topic accusation?

    Those are fighting words on UO.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on February 14, 2012, 09:14:40 PM
    It's not a fight when only one side possesses this:

    (http://yangerlawblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/delete-button1.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on February 14, 2012, 09:35:35 PM
    Ha ha. Okay you win.  :wave:
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on February 14, 2012, 10:42:48 PM
    It's not a fight when only one side possesses this:

    (http://yangerlawblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/delete-button1.jpg)

    Haha. Abuse of power. Ever consider running for office?! ;)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on February 15, 2012, 08:05:54 AM
    Haha. Abuse of power. Ever consider running for office?! ;)

    What, and give up all this?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: freethink on March 08, 2012, 11:45:31 PM
    Were number 7, were number 7...

    CNU's 2012 Freeways Without Futures

    7.  West Shoreway, Cleveland

    read on >>>>>>>>>>http://www.cnu.org/highways/freewayswithoutfutures2012 (http://www.cnu.org/highways/freewayswithoutfutures2012)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on March 09, 2012, 08:10:10 AM
    ^that's interesting.  As you read it, you are led to believe the project is actually moving forward, when it's not.

    Slightly relevant update - Per ODOT, the original construction contract on the 76th tunnel and Lake Aveune tunnel is being terminated and remaining work will be rebid.  Work at the Lake Ave tunnel is pretty much done except for some lighting & landscaping & fencing I believe.  76th Tunnel still needs all the work between the RR tracks & Shoreway - major excavation, paving, concrete retaining walls, storm drainage, etc.  ODOT is hoping to have the project awarded by May and work resume in June and finish by fall.   The soil conditions encountered in that area, sandy silt, required the retaining wall designs to be substantially increased. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on March 25, 2012, 08:47:09 AM
    ^that's interesting.  As you read it, you are led to believe the project is actually moving forward, when it's not.

    Slightly relevant update - Per ODOT, the original construction contract on the 76th tunnel and Lake Aveune tunnel is being terminated and remaining work will be rebid.  Work at the Lake Ave tunnel is pretty much done except for some lighting & landscaping & fencing I believe.  76th Tunnel still needs all the work between the RR tracks & Shoreway - major excavation, paving, concrete retaining walls, storm drainage, etc.  ODOT is hoping to have the project awarded by May and work resume in June and finish by fall.   The soil conditions encountered in that area, sandy silt, required the retaining wall designs to be substantially increased.

    http://noaca.org/presentations/oh1pt6billshort.pdf (http://noaca.org/presentations/oh1pt6billshort.pdf)

    NOACA has been working to resuscitate the project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on March 27, 2012, 07:29:00 AM
    When is Clifton going to get repaved?

    I have asked Dona this several times to no avail.  It is my understanding that there ARE dollars to repave Clifton from W117 to the start of the Shoreway but that the city wanted to roll it into the Boulevard Conversion.

    Well that ship has sailed and Clifton is a beat up concave mess.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on March 27, 2012, 07:32:16 AM
    When is Clifton going to get repaved?

    I have asked Dona this several times to no avail.  It is my understanding that there ARE dollars to repave Clifton from W117 to the start of the Shoreway but that the city wanted to roll it into the Boulevard Conversion.

    Well that ship has sailed and Clifton is a beat up concave mess.



    I've been told the budget is there as well.   I've been trying to get info out of Councilman Westbrook, not only on the road reconstruction, but hopefully sidewalks and aprons.   The road itself has become downright dangerous when it rains.  Larger trucks and SUV's throw up walls of water coming from the wagon tracks that have formed from commuter traffic.

    Please join me in this inquiry: 
    Jay Westbrook
    jwestbrook@clevelandcitycouncil.org
    ward18@clevelandcitycouncil.org
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on March 27, 2012, 07:45:12 AM
    ^ Thanks.  I fired off an email to Jay.  I also asked him about that burnt out Constantinos sign which has been an eyesore for years.  I can't believe there isn't some sort of sineage zoning that would force them to fix, remove, or get fined until it's fixed.  Makes the area look burnt out.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on March 27, 2012, 08:15:56 AM
    ^agreed!  I hate the way that sign frame looks!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on March 28, 2012, 08:27:33 AM
    When is Clifton going to get repaved?

    I have asked Dona this several times to no avail.  It is my understanding that there ARE dollars to repave Clifton from W117 to the start of the Shoreway but that the city wanted to roll it into the Boulevard Conversion.

    Well that ship has sailed and Clifton is a beat up concave mess.


    I thought this was part of the joint city-RTA project to repave and beautify Clifton? If so, I believe that ODOT, the city and RTA have gathered something like $5 million for this project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on March 28, 2012, 10:52:38 AM
    Jay responded with the following.  ~DS

    ***Posted with permission from Jay.

    "It is very likely that Clifton will be converted into a more aesthetically pleasing and more pedestrian friendly boulevard with select locations having landscaped islands and enhanced bus shelters. This plan is better than 2/3rd funded and the cities of Lakewood and Cleveland are making an appeal for the final portion and will know this summer.
     
    There is no doubt that the street surface is badly deteriorated and must be replaced. There will not be any significant delay to getting this done. We expect to know by this summer, if we can carry out the basic elements of the “Enhance Clifton” plan or just undertake the resurfacing of Clifton like Lakewood did a couple of years ago.

    Please be a bit more patient with the likelihood that we will be able to accomplish our greater plan.

    Thank you,

    Jay.   "



    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on March 28, 2012, 09:19:57 PM
    Jay responded with the following.  ~DS

    ***Posted with permission from Jay.

    "It is very likely that Clifton will be converted into a more aesthetically pleasing and more pedestrian friendly boulevard with select locations having landscaped islands and enhanced bus shelters. This plan is better than 2/3rd funded and the cities of Lakewood and Cleveland are making an appeal for the final portion and will know this summer.
     
    There is no doubt that the street surface is badly deteriorated and must be replaced. There will not be any significant delay to getting this done. We expect to know by this summer, if we can carry out the basic elements of the “Enhance Clifton” plan or just undertake the resurfacing of Clifton like Lakewood did a couple of years ago.

    Please be a bit more patient with the likelihood that we will be able to accomplish our greater plan.

    Thank you,

    Jay.   "





    I got a similar response from Mr. Westbrook approximately 6 months ago.  Quite frankly I don't think he knows what is going to happen with Clifton, but hold out hope that something gets done soon.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jmjr on April 14, 2012, 09:21:02 PM
    When is Clifton going to get repaved?

    I have asked Dona this several times to no avail.  It is my understanding that there ARE dollars to repave Clifton from W117 to the start of the Shoreway but that the city wanted to roll it into the Boulevard Conversion.

    Well that ship has sailed and Clifton is a beat up concave mess.



    Agreed it is a mess!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on May 29, 2012, 11:57:55 AM
    PD article on the Lorain-Carnegie Bridge bike/pedestrian improvements moved to "Cleveland: Lorain-Carnegie Bridge Bike/Pedestrian Improvements" ;)

    http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,25846.msg622818.html#msg622818 (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,25846.msg622818.html#msg622818)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on May 30, 2012, 06:00:56 AM
    Not very happy news out of ODOT on projects:

    http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118 (http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118)

    ODOT Announces Plans To Solve Financial Problems

    "It’s not news that the Ohio Department of Transportation is in financial trouble. But when ODOT Director Jerry Wray goes over the numbers, they may not be new, but they can be surprising.
     
    WRAY:  “There is a $1.6 billion funding shortfall for construction projects – those are projects that have been vetted through the process, ready to go to construction, and we don’t have enough money to build them. Plus, there’s another $10 billion worth of projects, future projects that are in the development process for which there is no money.”
     
    And Wray says that means some of these projects will be delayed years or decades if the situation doesn’t change."

    Wray also closes the door on any new tax revenue. 

    Not a Shoreway-specific article, but just another piece that darkens my hopefulness.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on May 30, 2012, 04:19:57 PM
    Not very happy news out of ODOT on projects:

    http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118 (http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118)

    ODOT Announces Plans To Solve Financial Problems

    "It’s not news that the Ohio Department of Transportation is in financial trouble. But when ODOT Director Jerry Wray goes over the numbers, they may not be new, but they can be surprising.
     
    WRAY:  “There is a $1.6 billion funding shortfall for construction projects – those are projects that have been vetted through the process, ready to go to construction, and we don’t have enough money to build them. Plus, there’s another $10 billion worth of projects, future projects that are in the development process for which there is no money.”
     
    And Wray says that means some of these projects will be delayed years or decades if the situation doesn’t change."

    Wray also closes the door on any new tax revenue. 

    Not a Shoreway-specific article, but just another piece that darkens my hopefulness.


    Not surprising.  Meanwhile SR 2 in Lake County gets more lanes and ugly ass sound walls.   All to support a system that will probably collapse under it's own weight of concrete and lack of gas tax revenue.     No wonder we lose our brightest young people to other cities....
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Boreal on May 31, 2012, 07:36:51 AM
    http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118 (http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118)
    Wray also closes the door on any new (gasoline) tax revenue. 
    The right wing ideologues in the legislature who are products of Ohio's gerrymandered districts and uncompetitive primaries will ensure that there is no gasoline tax hike.  They live in this world of delusion that the motoring public should not have to pay for the roads they use.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on May 31, 2012, 05:15:53 PM
    http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118 (http://www.ideastream.org/news/feature/47118)
    Wray also closes the door on any new (gasoline) tax revenue. 
    The right wing ideologues in the legislature who are products of Ohio's gerrymandered districts and uncompetitive primaries will ensure that there is no gasoline tax hike.  They live in this world of delusion that the motoring public should not have to pay for the roads they use.

    Ohio has the 8th highest gas tax, which is higher than Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Vermont, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Delaware, Connecticut, and Maryland, all of which are BLUE states.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: McLovin on June 02, 2012, 09:27:39 PM
    Cleveland-area planners to consider sending $27 million to West 73rd Street project

    The region's top planning body will vote on plowing $27 million into a new West Side link with the lakeshore.

    The five-county agency could vote as soon as Friday to send federal money to the West 73rd Street underpass, long planned in the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood. The project would extend West 73rd north as a tunnel under an active rail line. The street would then jog to the east and connect with an existing tunnel under the West Shoreway, leading to Edgewater Park.

    The project is part of a larger plan to convert the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard. Many commuters are opposed to converting the 50 mph highway into a 35 mph boulevard. That work is still not funded. ODOT announced in 2003 that it would set aside $50 million for the entire project. But costs for the project's first phase – improved pedestrian tunnels and the West 73rd Street underpass – spiraled as engineering problems mounted.

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/06/post_25.html (http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/06/post_25.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Boreal on June 03, 2012, 06:45:08 AM
    Ohio has the 8th highest gas tax, which is higher than Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Vermont, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Delaware, Connecticut, and Maryland, all of which are BLUE states.
    My former state senator Tim Grendell campaigned on lowering the gas tax. 
    What do you think Jerry Wray meant?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on June 04, 2012, 12:12:28 AM
    Ohio may have a comparatively high state gas tax, but it still hasn't kept up with the decline in gas tax revenues from flat/falling vehicle-miles traveled combined with more fuel-efficient vehicles. Meanwhile highway construction costs and materials have risen with rising costs of oil.  So each year ODOT ends up losing the equivalent of 2 cents per gallon of effective gas tax per year.

    Then there's the federal gas tax which hasn't be raised since 1993, although 2.5 cents/gallon of it was moved from deficit reduction to the highway trust fund in 1998. That's not been enough as the highway trust fund had to be bailed out three times totaling $34.5 million in 2008-10, not including another $62 million in federal stimulus funds from the general treasury (not the highway trust fund) that was spent on highway projects in 2009-12. So that removed a big chunk of the project backlog that was awaiting highway trust fund dollars.

    We still have a huge backlog of unfunded projects. It will take either a large increase of fees on motorists (be they new gas taxes, new mileage fees, expanded use of tolls, etc.) or a reduction in lane-miles to reduce costs of maintaining the roadway system.

    Elected officials keep delaying making hard choices while waiting for a transportation tooth fairy to dream up some creative revenue source that won't cost motorists anything new while letting officials cut ribbons for new road projects. Each morning they wake up disappointed. Not only is there no new coin under the pillow, but the pillowcase starts to wear out, next the sheets, next the pillow, then the mattress, then the bed....

    Gee, if you want something, ya gotta pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, you get it taken away from you.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on June 06, 2012, 05:57:11 PM
    Hope the local/regional funding comes through.

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20Major%20New%20Construction%20Program.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20Major%20New%20Construction%20Program.pdf)

    Today's TRAC has ODOT stalling on W.73rd project until 2022 :(
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on June 07, 2012, 07:18:39 AM
    They show it here as 2021, just for the W. 73rd connection.  At a cost of $32 million.  By then it will be $132 million.

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20Major%20New%20Construction%20Program.pdf (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20Major%20New%20Construction%20Program.pdf)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on June 12, 2012, 10:21:58 AM
    Neighborhood update with Councilman Zone offered the following

     - 76th pedestrian tunnel: remaining work was rebid, bids accepted last week.  Hoping to get contract & work resume by end of July/early August.  Assuming no more unforeseen conditions or major delays, work should be substantially complete this year with touch up done next year

     - 73rd interchange: design & development work done in 2013, hoping to bid & start the construction in 2014 and be complete in 2016.  Councilman Zone was very shaky on this timeline.  He alluded to some politics at work and how this project could quickly be shifted to the back-burner again if NOACA decides some other projects are higher priority.  I personally don't see this one going forward anytime soon.  Last estimate was $30+ million and by next year it will be over $40 million. 

     - Old warehouse at 1200 W. 76th: not part of the Shoreway, but plans unveiled to convert this as 39 loft style apartments with first floor parking & retail.  Name of the building: "The Shoreway".  Renderings had lit signage atop the building that would be visible to drivers on shoreway below.  Clever.  Developers pursuing historic tax credit financing so it's a ways off yet, but first look seems very viable.  Overall neighborhood response was enthusiastic.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on July 03, 2012, 05:09:29 PM
    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/06/post_34.html (http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/06/post_34.html)


    Quote
    Cleveland's pursuit of West 73rd underpass could delay other road projects

    .....

    NOACA said Friday that pots of federal cash for dozens of road and bridge projects can bear a $27 million hit for the West 73rd project, only if Cleveland puts off millions of dollars of improvements on six projects until at least 2016.

    That includes $5.7 million for work on Triskett Road; $3.8 million for Woodland Road; and $1.8 million for Larchmere Boulevard.

    An unhappy Robert Brown, Cleveland's planning director, told a NOACA committee Friday that Cleveland does not want to delay those three projects.

    They are "well advanced" and "ready to go," he said.

    The city is willing to push back work on Waterloo Road and on bridges near Tower City, he said. And the city could possibly delay replacing an East 79th Street bridge, Brown said......

    The funding tussle could come to a head July 13, when the NOACA board is scheduled to vote on the underpass project.



    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: musky on July 20, 2012, 06:39:14 AM
    Noticed this week (several times) that the equipment that has been sitting in place for months has been moved around. And yesterday there was a large crane in place. Did I miss something? Has there been an immediate release of funds for this?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: urbanlife on July 20, 2012, 09:23:02 AM
    Noticed this week (several times) that the equipment that has been sitting in place for months has been moved around. And yesterday there was a large crane in place. Did I miss something? Has there been an immediate release of funds for this?

    the original contractor left the project and it was rebid.  my understanding was that a new contractor was chosen and was supposed to start work this summer, with possible completion by end of year or early next year.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on July 20, 2012, 09:30:02 AM
    Original contractor was Stevens Contracting.  They did the Lake Ave tunnel & bulk of the work at 76th including the work down in Edgewater Park.  Soil conditions required redesign of the retaining wall foundations.  Result was a massive cost increase ($1.3 million on a job that originally cost just over $2 million).  ODOT opted to rebid the work.  New low bidder was Great Lakes Construction.  They officially started Monday July 9th.  First order of business is driving more sheet pile to stabilize the slope, then massive augered piles with huge rebar cages will be installed for the wall foundations. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on July 20, 2012, 10:55:59 AM
    Thanks. I wondered about the crane moved on-site, too.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: musky on July 20, 2012, 11:14:46 AM
    Awesome - double thanks.

    So glad this is moving ahead again. I t was very depressing seeing that equipment sit there and weeds grow taller every day.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 11, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
    Augured piles and steel is being set in place now for what will become the main headwall to hold back the rail road slope.  Finally some real action taking place this week.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 27, 2012, 02:00:01 PM
    Look for major update tomorrow on the 73rd interchange project at the Shoreway.  Apparently the City obtained their portion of the funding ($12 million) and they are moving forward, planning construction start in spring.

    Still have to bid the work out.  Should be interesting to see what the actual bids come in versus the budget amount.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on September 27, 2012, 05:14:48 PM
    I was also told by a friend that Jay Westbrook told him that RTA had secured funding for the Clifton waiting environment upgrades.  There is due to be a public meeting on the status of funding for road reconstruction in October.   Could be some good things happening on the near west side in the next couple years.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 27, 2012, 10:26:24 PM
    I was also told by a friend that Jay Westbrook told him that RTA had secured funding for the Clifton waiting environment upgrades.  There is due to be a public meeting on the status of funding for road reconstruction in October.   Could be some good things happening on the near west side in the next couple years.

    Old news. They have the funding to proceed......
    http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.msg631964.html#msg631964 (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.msg631964.html#msg631964)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on September 28, 2012, 12:17:01 AM
    I was also told by a friend that Jay Westbrook told him that RTA had secured funding for the Clifton waiting environment upgrades.  There is due to be a public meeting on the status of funding for road reconstruction in October.   Could be some good things happening on the near west side in the next couple years.

    Old news. They have the funding to proceed......
    http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.msg631964.html#msg631964 (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.msg631964.html#msg631964)

    Yes I guess I didn't tie it together--RTA funding is set--the city needs to seek the funding for the actual street and sidewalks, then they can get started.  This, in my mind, is a absolute travesty given the condition of the road and it's status as a major commuter thoroughfare.   It should be repaired no matter what beautification happens.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 28, 2012, 08:06:47 AM
    The funding for the street resurfacing/pavement is included in the $9.5 million, for a project to start in state fiscal year 2014 (SFY starts July 1, 2013).

    The breakdown of funding sources/amounts for that project AND the West 73rd extension and underpass (to keep this on topic) are both listed on Page 5 at http://www.noaca.org/res2012033.pdf (http://www.noaca.org/res2012033.pdf)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on September 29, 2012, 05:00:16 PM
    Same news today on Cleveland.com.   Will be good to see the comments on that story! ;)

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/09/odot_promises_12_million_to_la.html (http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/09/odot_promises_12_million_to_la.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 04, 2012, 07:12:57 AM
    short notice but apparently Governor Kasich is going to be in Battery Park today to announce this 73rd Interchange project with Mayor Jackson, Councilman Zone, etc. 

    All the local media will be there as well.  11am.  Local wine bar will be open for people to eat/drink afterward.  Feel free to check it out
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on October 04, 2012, 09:30:52 AM
    short notice but apparently Governor Kasich is going to be in Battery Park today to announce this 73rd Interchange project with Mayor Jackson, Councilman Zone, etc. 

    All the local media will be there as well.  11am.  Local wine bar will be open for people to eat/drink afterward.  Feel free to check it out

    I'm starting to get the impression that John Kasich appreciates Cleveland a bit more than his predecessor.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on October 04, 2012, 12:35:36 PM
    Maybe Kasich is surprised we're not all godless welfare queens?

    Seriously, I noted that construction workers were back at it this morning along the West Shoreway at West 73rd. First time I'd seen anyone working there in weeks (months?) -- though I've been taking the Red Line to the office lately, not the 55. So I may have missed them restarting work in recent days.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 04, 2012, 12:39:51 PM
    ^those workers are there for the 76th tunnel project.  Been actively driving piles & caisson tube steel for the last 3 weeks which will serve as the base for the massive retaining walls along the RR tracks.

    Not sure what the "godless welfare queens" remark means, but it's ironic that the same dignitaries you'll see shaking hands with Kasich on the 6pm news were all cussing him up & down barely a year ago when it was announced this project funding was being pulled...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on October 04, 2012, 12:46:07 PM
    I give Mayor Jackson and friends (and the Governor) credit for recharging this project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on October 04, 2012, 12:50:09 PM
    ^ no need to give them credit, they are giving plenty of credit to themselves.  I swung by the presser and they couldnt pat themselves on the back more.  One thing is missing here...what the ACTUAL RESIDENTS of the neighborhood consider.  I live closer to this project than anyone in the city of Cleveland.  My neighbors and I are slightly bent.  I think there are some pros to the project, but in reality, there will be a highway off-ramp in my front yard.  What was suppose to be a component of the boulevard project, is now just an off-ramp that secludes the Battery Park neighborhood from Father Caruso and makes the neighborhood where councilman Zone and the older townhomes a nice, quiet cul-de-sac.  Im not an obsturctionist and I like progress, but 40 mill?  For what?  What about the potholes all up and down 73rd, 65th, 58th, Herman, Tillman, etc.  HOw about some streetscape on Lake Ave between Detroit and CLifton?  No, this is a ploy for the politicians so they can mark down "what they got done".
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Htsguy on October 04, 2012, 01:23:34 PM
    I gave up trying to follow and understand this project quite some time ago as I am under the impression that the boulevard concept is either being scaled back or dismissed entirely (I really don't know which or whether the project as originally conceived is still a go).

    So I guess my question is...is this work at West 73rd going to result in an "intersection" (you know...four ways with either a stop signs or a stop light) or simply, (as suggested by Believeland) an on and off ramp to the Shoreway.  Since the word "interchange" is being used I am guessing the later which clearly is not how I first envisioned this project and certainly would not encourage development.

    The powers that be now simply seem to be touting this as an easier way to get from the Gordon Square neighborhood and surroundings area to the lakefront.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 04, 2012, 01:26:36 PM
    No it won't be an intersection.  It will come from up above in Battery Park, dive down under the RR tracks and connect near the Edgewater on/off ramp.  No interruption of Shoreway traffic whatsoever
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on October 04, 2012, 07:59:34 PM
    No it won't be an intersection.  It will come from up above in Battery Park, dive down under the RR tracks and connect near the Edgewater on/off ramp.  No interruption of Shoreway traffic whatsoever

    I had no idea--I thought it was the start of an intersection in the making.  Is there an overview of the project anywhere?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 04, 2012, 08:12:24 PM
    go to "Cleveland Lakefront West" and see the latest documents there
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on October 05, 2012, 06:05:29 AM
    No it won't be an intersection.  It will come from up above in Battery Park, dive down under the RR tracks and connect near the Edgewater on/off ramp.  No interruption of Shoreway traffic whatsoever

    Okay, well, thanks gottaplan and Believeland1 for ruining my rare good mood! I also thought this was the beginning of the boulevard concept - an intersection.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on October 05, 2012, 06:52:32 AM
    This thing has evolved over time.  I think residents mostly supported it as a component of the boulevard project, but we all know that wont happen.  So essentially it is an off-ramp.  Kasich likes the connection to the lake and actually i agree.  I dont understand why they cant shave about 5-10 mill off the price and JUST make it a street connecting to Edgewater.  Why the off-ramps?  Its no quicker to Gordon Square for people coming from the west...they get off at Lake.  People from the east get off at 49th or else they are backtracking.  This stems from a handshake before there were Battery Park residents, now that there are residents they should have a say,  not just the developers.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 05, 2012, 08:11:19 AM
    It still may not happen.  They have $35 million in place for funding.  What happens when estimates come in at $45 million.  Just because the governor showed up and shook some hands with local officials doesn't mean it's a done deal.  This is still a very big, very complex undertaking, involving massive utility relocations, private property acquisition, railroad closure for the new bridge trestle, massive retaining walls....  if the price ticks up again and Councilman Zone comes out begging for money again, people will really start to question what else that $40 million could do around the area....  especially when other existing infrastructure is falling apart
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on October 05, 2012, 08:14:44 AM
    For $40 million I would think they could redo most of the Shoreway with the median and intersections AND put a pedestrian/bike bridge OVER the tracks for the residents!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on October 05, 2012, 08:28:33 AM
    For $40 million I would think they could redo most of the Shoreway with the median and intersections AND put a pedestrian/bike bridge OVER the tracks for the residents!

    You know it's funny.  For as much as we complain about ODOT dollars going to projects that foster sprawl, how do you think the rest of the state looks at a project like this?

    I just hope they get Clifton resurfaced in March. 

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on October 06, 2012, 09:25:16 AM
    Not sure what the "godless welfare queens" remark means,

    Oh how soon we forget what Kasich thinks of cities, especially messy, organic, melting pot, blue-collar Democratic cities like Cleveland. He and many other small-town fundamentalists consider them cesspools of immorality. And it shapes their politics of picking winners and losers.

    So, back to this road...

    $40 million doesn't buy you much in terms of road construction anymore. Twenty years ago, you could finish the Jennings Freeway for near that amount. Today, you can't rebuild a short highway like the Shoreway for that. With declining gas tax revenues and the unwillingness of legislators to enact new revenues, roads will be in even worse shape in coming years and some lesser-used roads may even close due to lack of funding.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on October 09, 2012, 10:13:58 AM
    Between West 65th and West 25th there really is not any reason to slow it down IMO. I would love to see it become street level, and 25 mph once it hits West 25th heading east. It would become a widened Main Avenue, which will go into a lift bridge over to the east bank of the flats. From there traffic would go up Main Avenue through the Warehouse District, and Main Avenue would then connect with Lakeside. The bridge over the tracks, south of the stadium would be removed, and everything from West 3rd to dead mans curve would be converted into a 35 mph boulevard.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 09, 2012, 02:42:33 PM
    The at-grade connections which some people are big fans of is essentially a moot point.  And not because it confounds the west side commuters.  It's a huge cost for very little benefit.  What's the point of having an at grade intersection at 76th & 65th when you already have one at 73rd?  Likewise for 54th & 58th, when 45th is 1.5 mins away, just up Tillman.

    The whole thing that got this thread stirred back up is the cost of the 73rd interchange.  The railroad tracks here are a huge obstacle which is very expensive to overcome.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on October 10, 2012, 07:08:51 AM
    The at-grade connections which some people are big fans of is essentially a moot point.  And not because it confounds the west side commuters.  It's a huge cost for very little benefit.  What's the point of having an at grade intersection at 76th & 65th when you already have one at 73rd?  Likewise for 54th & 58th, when 45th is 1.5 mins away, just up Tillman.

    I respectfully disagree. The Tillman ramp is awful to drive on. The way it's set up to enter Shoreway going west is a disaster trying to merge - and it's not due to traffic; it's because there's a blind curve preceding it! If it was actually used more the result would be a complete bottleneck. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on October 10, 2012, 07:59:48 AM
    Anyone else notice that ODOT installed exit number signage for the West Shoreway yesterday? Kind of funny for a road that may become a boulevard there are now numbered exits! I think West 45th was exit 194. Not sure how they got the numbering scheme.

    And with regards to RTA and the 55, it's such a shame what's happened to that route with such service cut backs. I made the mistake of hopping on the 55 at Clifton only to find it exiting the shoreway at West 45th and crawling up Detroit. Consequently I was 20 minutes late for work and will avoid the 55 in the future. The bus seemed emptier than usual. I'm curious how much ridership the 55 has lost now that it can't "express" into downtown?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: sizzlinbeef on October 10, 2012, 11:32:02 AM
    Aren't exits usually numbered by the mile marker that they exit at?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on October 11, 2012, 07:45:42 AM
    Public meeting on transportation enhancement options for Clifton.

    November 8th 6:30 @ Lousia May Alcott school on Baltic. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on October 12, 2012, 10:50:47 AM
    Public meeting on transportation enhancement options for Clifton.

    November 8th 6:30 @ Lousia May Alcott school on Baltic. 

    Thanks. Can you share a source link for that? It's also worth posting in the Clifton transit enhancements thread in the transit section of this forum.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on October 12, 2012, 11:17:42 AM
    Public meeting on transportation enhancement options for Clifton.

    November 8th 6:30 @ Lousia May Alcott school on Baltic. 

    Thanks. Can you share a source link for that? It's also worth posting in the Clifton transit enhancements thread in the transit section of this forum.

    I was told this by Anita the Director at Cudell.  I reached her via. the contact link on their website.



    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on October 12, 2012, 11:22:38 AM
     I had similar information from a friend that spoke with Jay Westbrook but have not seen anything official either online or on paper.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on October 16, 2012, 08:07:20 AM
    OK, now we're getting too far off-topic. Can we leave it at this:  when the Shoreway-Main Avenue Bridge is due for major repairs or replacement, that ODOT, this region, and Cleveland are going to have a big, difficult to decision to make. We are not yet at that decision point.

    And let me leave this with two corrections:

    1. The estimated start-up capital cost for Cleveland-Lorain commuter rail is about $150 million, if I recall correctly. The reason it is so low is because much of the tracks are already there, in excellent condition and are lightly used for freight. Discuss this (include yesterday's big news) at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1916.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1916.0.html)
    2. The $25 million figure for Blue Line extension is to reach the southeast side of the Warrensville-Chagrin intersection. To extend the Blue Line 2-3 miles to Harvard-Interstate 271 is another $155 million on top of that. Discuss this at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17886.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17886.0.html)

    Now let's return to our regularly scheduled program.......

    If you want to continue to discuss removing the Shoreway-Main Avenue High Level Bridge, it's probably best to do so at this thread (where all messages on this bridge removal subject were moved).....

    http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,8230.0.html (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,8230.0.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on October 16, 2012, 09:10:49 AM
    I had similar information from a friend that spoke with Jay Westbrook but have not seen anything official either online or on paper.

    It was officially released in the Cudell newsletter on Friday.

    Clifton Boulevard Public Meeting

    On Thursday, November 8 at 6:30 PM at Alcott School on Baltic Road, the city of Cleveland, RTA and ODOT will hold discussion on proposed plans for transit enhancements on Clifton Boulevard in Cleveland.  All are invited to share ideas and comment on proposals for enhanced waiting environments, landscaped medians, traffic signalization upgrades and resurfacing options.   Call Councilman Westbrook at 216.664.4230 or Anita at Cudell at 216.228.4383 for further information.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on October 16, 2012, 09:30:26 AM
    Please post that in the Enhance Clifton transit project thread. Thanks.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: pglowack on November 08, 2012, 01:11:41 PM
    Saw this on Facebook just now....

    City of Cleveland Mayor Frank G. Jackson and Ohio Governor John Kasich recently announced that funding for a vital lakefront development link is confirmed, allowing the West 73rd Street connector to Edgewater Park to begin construction in 2013. The new underpass project supports the ongoing economic and community development of the Detroit-Shoreway neighborhood and helps put people to work.
    This project supports Mayor Jackson’s vision of opening up the City’s lakefront to residents, businesses and visitors and ensuring that all of Cleveland is connected to its most vital natural asset – Lake Erie.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Grumpy on November 26, 2012, 12:44:58 PM
    in the future there will be descion made to replace the Main avenue bridge, since route 2 will be a 35mph boulevard does it continue to make sense to spend 500-600 million dollars to replace the high level main avenue bridge which is the the longest bridge to cross the Cuyahoga river and the least used bridge to cross the river in the county.

    imagine what a difference it would be if the bridge was removed from west 25th to East 6th or so, and replaced with intersections at west 9th, west 6th, west 3rd and east 9th.   

    concerns are congestion, and inconvenience to the relatively small numbers of drivers that actually travel the full span of the bridge.   

    the benefit tothe warehouse district is by remving ramps you opens up acres of land for development and improve the quality of life there by reducing the noise and dust Associated with a freeway.
    I've always thought the ride across that bridge was unique in that you feel like you're swerving between high rises in the middle of the air, but I agree that removing it is probably the better use of that land. The real advantage of it though is that if ODOT can be convinced that the bridge doesn't need to be replaced as a high level bridge, they might be willing to go along with removing it instead to save money, which would make future changes to the Shoreway in the Boulevard direction make more sense.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 26, 2012, 02:39:55 PM
    Some historical views from the 1920s-40s:

    Aerial, 1932, with the Main Avenue swing bridge visible....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Main-Ave-08-28-1932.jpg)


    Main Avenue swing bridge, April 2, 1937.....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Mainstreetswingbridge-04-02-1937.jpg)


    Main Avenue swing bridge, July 31, 1937.....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Mainstreetswingbridge-07-31-1937.jpg)


    From the west side looking to the east side where a train crossing Main Avenue has caused traffic to back up on June 8, 1938 (a year before the high-level bridge opened)....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/MainStreetswingbridge-westside-jamfromrr-xingoneastside-06-08-1938.jpg)


    Trains crossing on both sides of the bridge caused traffic jams on both sides of the swing bridge....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Mainstreetswingbridge-04-06-1938.jpg)


    In the final years of the Main Avenue swing bridge. Viewed in June 9, 1945....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Mainstreetswingbridge-06-09-1945-2.jpg)


    Same day, different view.....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Historical/Mainstreetswingbridge-06-09-1945.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on November 27, 2012, 07:42:43 AM
    Rebar and forms going up today for the retaining walls along the RR tracks at 76th.  Seems like they plan on working through the winter.  Should really start taking shape in the next few weeks. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on November 27, 2012, 09:19:11 PM
    keeping with the idea of making the shoreway a Boulevard, IF the shoreway bridge is removed, how far east could the bridge reasonably intersect with the street grid on the West Bank?  How much of the flyover portion could be removed?

    I know these are big ifs, but is there a structural engineering reason the W. 26th exit/entrance couldn't be an at grade intersection?  Then the bunker then a huge bunker that separates Ohio City from the lakefront could be removed
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 27, 2012, 09:53:19 PM
    I know these are big ifs, but is there a structural engineering reason the W. 26th exit/entrance couldn't be an at grade intersection?  Then the bunker then a huge bunker that separates Ohio City from the lakefront could be removed

    You mean like it was before the Shoreway replaced Bulkley Boulevard?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on November 27, 2012, 10:52:57 PM
    ^Im not that old!  Did Buckley Boulevard go into the flats, or did it end at W. 25th (which it was probably called something else back then)

    To rephrase my question, could the future shoreway boulevard have a bridge that starts and ends roughly the same configuration as the Detroit-Superior (Vets Memorial) Bridge? 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 27, 2012, 11:31:48 PM
    So how old do you think I am? Bulkley Boulevard went from the intersection of Clifton and Lake, ran past the Edgewater Bathhouse below the New York Central mainline, curved next to the Westinghouse Plant, past the waterworks and the new Lakeview homes before curving into the intersection of West 25th and Detroit Avenue -- all of it like the Shoreway does today except without the grade separated intersections! But Bulkley had some trees and grass along it to show motorists (and horse-drawn carriages before) that this was a special road to the lakefront parks and the garden suburbs beyond.

    So I fired up my time machine with the hover conversion kit, hit 88 mph, and got these shots for ya.....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Clevelandhistory/ClevelandJuly1930aerial_zps566586eb.jpg)

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Clevelandhistory/Flats1939.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Boreal on November 28, 2012, 06:40:17 PM
    Good job on the photos, KJP.  I presume that you have perused the collection at Cleveland Public Library.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on November 28, 2012, 07:37:43 PM
    It's always said that the Shoreway has always been the biggest barrier to lakefront access. Let's not forget that one of the very first things built on the west side of Cleveland was the rail line along the coast. This rail line was put in decades before any homes/buildings and streets popped up on the west side and has pretty much guided all development long before the current Shoreway was materialized.

    Here are some fun old maps to look at that show different evolutions of the neighborhoods in this area:

    1874:
    http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/36273/West+Cleveland+++North/ (http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/36273/West+Cleveland+++North/)

    1898:
    http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/170061/Cleveland+City+++Part+008/ (http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/170061/Cleveland+City+++Part+008/)
    http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/170150/West+Cleveland+++Part+001/ (http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/170150/West+Cleveland+++Part+001/)


    Here's a map of 1913 pre Shoreway:
    http://historical.mytopo.com/getImage.asp?fname=clvl03nw.jpg&state=OH (http://historical.mytopo.com/getImage.asp?fname=clvl03nw.jpg&state=OH)

    And for fun, here's an 1898 rendering of the Edgewater Parkway. This would have been constructed on fake land (just as today's is) and then flowed into W 58th Street via an underpass.
    http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/1248214/ (http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/1248214/)

    It's comical that here we are in the 21st century talking about building underpasses under that rail line to connect to the lake when they were proposing to do it in the 19th century :-D I guess things just take a really long time here.  :-D
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on November 28, 2012, 08:08:26 PM
    Great maps!

    Good job on the photos, KJP.  I presume that you have perused the collection at Cleveland Public Library.

    No, just the clevelandmemory.com collection.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on December 15, 2012, 06:05:01 AM
    There is fresh orange spray paint this morning marking the cable lines as well as some small (by hand) digging along the strip of land North of Father Caruso Drive from W73rd to W 70th.   Maybe finally getting ready to move that sewer as part of the 73rd st. underpass?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on January 02, 2013, 03:54:34 PM
    Drainage, signage, lighting and associated amenities of the West 73rd extension under the tracks to the West Shoreway are on CPC's agenda for Jan. 4. Graphics are posted at:

    http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/01042013/index.php (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/01042013/index.php)

    (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/01042013/image/West_Shoreway_19.jpg)

    (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/01042013/image/West_Shoreway_21.jpg)

    (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/01042013/image/West_Shoreway_27.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on January 04, 2013, 08:00:45 PM
    Update on West 73rd on Cleveland.com. 

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/01/clevelands_west_73rd_underpass.html (http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/01/clevelands_west_73rd_underpass.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: New World Techno Boy on January 04, 2013, 09:03:09 PM
    I'm curious who is building this thing - they've been working on it for the past year that I've been driving downtown and I see activity every day, but progress is insanely and pathetically slow.  Seems like two grandpas and some tools working on something at a very slow pace....Maybe a bunch of retired guys that don't care about when the project is done?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on January 04, 2013, 09:15:30 PM
    you're confused with the 76th tunnel.  And it's going so slow because it's expensive to pour concrete when its freezing outside
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on January 07, 2013, 10:50:21 AM
    you're confused with the 76th tunnel.  And it's going so slow because it's expensive to pour concrete when its freezing outside

    But there's been stretches of several months of inactivity where equipment is just sitting there without a soul anywhere nearby.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on January 07, 2013, 10:55:30 AM
    The previous contract was terminated & the remaining work was rebid based of new designs for the structural steel.    The lag time was waiting for the fabricated steel caissons to arrive.  Weather permitting, I think you'll see steady progress straight through the winter & into the spring.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on January 08, 2013, 05:21:04 AM
    I think there was a span of 10 months where the pedestrian tunnel redesign wasn't even moving at all, but the equipment just lay idle along it. It does seem that this project has been ongoing for almost 2-3 years now, which is insanely long compared to other projects in the region.

    It also seems like there's new graffiti on this every month or so and with those huge new concrete walls, this is just begging to be tagged upon completion.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on January 08, 2013, 06:34:17 AM
    There was a period of at least 8 or 9 months where nothing happened.  ODOT had to redesign the retaining walls because the original design with soil nails wasn't holding the slope back.  I agree on the graffiti tags on the new concrete, but the final design features a wire mesh which will be covered with ivy plants to give it a natural look and no hard surfaces to paint.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on January 31, 2013, 12:53:28 PM
    Heads up for all interested.  There is a public meeting tonight at Mt. Carmel Church at 6:30 about the West 73rd interchange.  It will be a public forum demanded by local residents.  ODOT, City will be there, and possibly some media.  Should be a productive meeting.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on February 12, 2013, 07:28:25 AM
    Did anyone attend that meeting or get new info out of it?  I was supposed to go but got stuck late at work.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on February 12, 2013, 08:57:05 AM
    Yeah, it was recapped in the Detroit Shoreway thread.  Update for the 73rd Connection is basically that they are bidding it late spring, starting this summer.  Planning to be a 3 year project.  First year will be entirely taken up by the sewer line relocation, 2nd year is rebuilding the new bridge, 3rd year is sitework on either side of the RR tracks.  Might as well call it 4 yrs.  ODOT says they have contingency money built in for cost overruns and are prepared to go forward. 

    Some misinformation about the tan colored shipping/receiving building at 73rd & Caruso.  Councilman Zone said it was getting demo'd as part of the project.  ODOT said "oh no it's not".  Zone said the Battery Park developer owned it and was tearing it down.  Battery Park said "not yet we don't".  Stay tuned on that.

    76th tunnel will be open in July complete with "glacier" style public art

    Catanzerite warehouse at 76th is definitely moving ahead with loft apartment renovation.  Looking to start work in May, should take a year, then leasing.  Retail on first floor cut back from 9,000 to 5,000 sf and a few apartments were added on the first floor instead
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on February 12, 2013, 10:27:47 AM
    Some misinformation about the tan colored shipping/receiving building at 73rd & Caruso.  Councilman Zone said it was getting demo'd as part of the project.  ODOT said "oh no it's not".  Zone said the Battery Park developer owned it and was tearing it down.  Battery Park said "not yet we don't".  Stay tuned on that.


    Cool Hand Luke - Failure to Communicate (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2f-MZ2HRHQ#ws)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on July 12, 2013, 09:07:32 AM
    Fast forward to July 12, 2013.   Tunnel is done and open.  And today I saw a survey crew working out on the Shoreway.   I get hopefully that there is more planning underway!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on July 13, 2013, 05:35:58 AM
    Matt Zone & DSCDO are holding a community meeting on the West 73rd Underpass project this week.

    Thurday night July 18th at 6:30 in the OLMC  school gym on W 70th.     ODOT and Great Lakes Construction reps to make presentations.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on July 17, 2013, 11:35:55 AM
    Thanks to all the rain, the grass has all filled in around the slope near the tunnel. Looks really great. But why are there still orange construction cones everywhere? How long before ODOT removes them? Are they still doing residual work around the tunnel? Would be nice to see the project "officially" complete with no miscellaneous work type objects laying around the site.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on July 17, 2013, 11:42:02 AM
    Thanks to all the rain, the grass has all filled in around the slope near the tunnel. Looks really great. But why are there still orange construction cones everywhere? How long before ODOT removes them? Are they still doing residual work around the tunnel? Would be nice to see the project "officially" complete with no miscellaneous work type objects laying around the site.

    Probably the same group of under achievers who used to manage maintenance at Edgewater ;)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jmjr on July 21, 2013, 05:55:58 PM
    I think there is still some work to be done on the tunnel - mostly landscaping. Some of the railings have not been cemented in I think because they need to get behind them to plant the plants that will climb up the metal grids on the walls. I do wish that they had considered placing a bench or two along the path. Some folks may want to take a break along the way. Add some trash cans too.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on July 21, 2013, 06:10:07 PM
    Matt Zone & DSCDO are holding a community meeting on the West 73rd Underpass project this week.

    Thurday night July 18th at 6:30 in the OLMC  school gym on W 70th.     ODOT and Great Lakes Construction reps to make presentations.

    Upcoming 73rd project is going to be huge.  Train tracks will be temporarily rerouted to the south, closer to Caruso, while the new railroad bridge & headwalls are built.  Father Caruso street is going to start getting torn up down by 67th and the work will progress west toward Battery Park.  8' diameter sewer will be laid in a 12' wide trench.  Driving sheet pile the entire length, 10 hrs a day for the next 10 months.  After the sewer is rerouted, the railroad bridge will start and 73rd excavation will begin next summer
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 05, 2013, 06:01:59 AM
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/W69constructionstarts_zps5ebd6ad5.jpg)





    7am today ... construction begins.  (They're cutting out the curb along the northernmost part of W69th at Fr. Caruso.)

    Interestingly, the orange closure sign leaves blank the number of days.  I'm thinking of going out there and painting in an  ∞    onto it. :)

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on August 05, 2013, 06:47:19 AM
    ^ haha.  Saw the same business over in Battery Park.  I had to tell my wife "remember this day".  The last day in about 5 years there will not be construction vehicles in our front yard.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 08, 2013, 06:58:57 AM

    Some misinformation about the tan colored shipping/receiving building at 73rd & Caruso.  Councilman Zone said it was getting demo'd as part of the project.  ODOT said "oh no it's not".  Zone said the Battery Park developer owned it and was tearing it down.  Battery Park said "not yet we don't".  Stay tuned on that.


    Word around the neighborhood is that the 7202 Fr. Caruso building is officially on the demo list.  True?

    Also apparantly there is now a bit of a disagreement on how Battery Park will connect to get Eastbound out of the neighborhood.  Apparantly continuing Fr. Frascati Est to hit W. 70th is the lead option, but the residents on 70th want an elevated bridge  on Fr. Caruso to go up and over the tunnel and continue to use Fr. Caruso as the main E/W passage.   Any info?


    And finally ... here's the view this morning.   Sewer being trenched out I think.

    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/shoreway_zps3dcc055f.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: BelievelandD1 on August 08, 2013, 07:11:13 AM
    ^ITS the residents on 70th that want a bridge???  Yes those are the two options accoridng to Councilman Zone, who is framing it as ODOT gets to make the decision based on stuidies.  The bridge would be obsolete and terrible ideas.  Terrible urban planning, waste of money and will be underutilized.

    They are demo'ing 7202 eventually.  The only realistic option is to punch Frascati through. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on August 08, 2013, 07:17:54 AM
    In that photo, they are digging the new railroad bed.  The tracks are going to be re-layed to the vacant area to the south.  The trains will run on this new, temporary track location while the existing tracks are cut off, and a bridge headwall gets installed.

    Wait till the sheet pile driving starts.  10-12 hrs a day, 10 months straight.

    There are a couple options for connecting BP to the eastern neighborhoods

    1.  Do nothing and leave the plans as is.  You can walk or bike directly from 73rd back to the eastern section of Caruso via a new sidewalk that will go along the RR tracks.  Cars would still have to go back up to Detroit & around
    2.  Add the car bridge over the lowered 73rd.  I don't see this happening.  It's too late in the game and too expensive.  The project will have plenty of cost overruns to eat up whatever is currently available
    3.  Punch Frascati through from 73rd over to 70th once that tan shipping & receiving building is done.  This is most logical, but it bisects that parcel, now owned by Vintage Development, in a way that makes a little sliver on the south totally unusable and makes the overall parcel even smaller.  Developing this parcel will already be a challenge.  They will have to create access somehow for this parcel from 70th I think, even though any development will face the west & north primarily
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 08, 2013, 08:20:36 AM
    From a railroad perspective, the new tracks around the construction site (called a shoefly) is going to be difficult operationally. The railroad right of way climbs at a 0.8 percent grade from the bridge at the mouth of Cuyahoga River to near Triskett Road. Doesn't sound like much, but some longer, heavier trains really struggle to climb that grade. And adding track curvature to a grade increases the effective rate of gradient.

    It will also be interesting to see how Amtrak does through the shoefly. Amtrak's normal operating speed past Edgewater Park is 79 mph. That will be significantly reduced through the shoefly.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on August 08, 2013, 08:29:51 AM
    They aren't doing anything with the tracks until the sewer is done. I was at the meeting with ODOT, the contractor, the water department and Zone last week.  They will first be driving pilings to trench in the sewer.  any pile driving for the tracks will occur at 73rd, the photo shows the intersection of 69th.



    CPP is also putting the power underground along the sewer work..


    they are taking up both sides of the road the same distance.  The sewers are massive, they are replacing them and the "intercepts" at 69th and 70th which are even more massive.

    the tracks are moving 30 feet.  There is a double track ( the train is on the nearest of the 2)  the track you see in front of the train is about the 30 feet the tracks are moving  that is an old un-used siding for all the heavy  industry (everyready battery plant -- now battery park to the westinghouse builiding) that used to be here back in the day. 

    There is no reason Frascati has to go straight through, put a jog in it so it is on on the edge of the parcel.

    I know the fracsati option backed by zone, cant imagine ODOT or anybody else changing the current plan after they have broken ground.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 08, 2013, 09:09:06 AM
    Understood. Even a track displacement as little as 30 feet adds more effective gradient. BTW, the siding is not unused. It is called the West Park Secondary track and extends as far west as Berea. Some sections of it are used more than others -- the part from Rockport Yard (next to I-480) to Berea is used 15-20 times daily. But I suspect Norfolk Southern will require that the WPS be restored at the conclusion of this project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on August 08, 2013, 10:21:06 AM
    Wasnt sure about the western terminus  but the eastern end is the westinghouse building as in inside the westinghouse building.  I have walked that track from down around whiskey island to where the construction is now.

    Dergon can back me up on this because I know he walks his dog there...from battery park east that track has not been used for anything (i have been there 3 yeas and not seen anything on those tracks)   and if you get down on ground level and walk it.. to my uneducated eye is currently unusable.  it is not flat and level the tracks are not true and perpendicular.  The Ballast is uneven.  the siding sits between 3 and 5 feet lower than the tracks.  and that 2 foot difference can be within a 100 foot run.


    Anything done short of removing them entirely will probably place them in better condition than they are now.  Since that is where the "temporary" double tracks are going, I expect the foundation to much better than what is there now.


    But regardless.  Digging out/driving pilings for the sewers.  then the train "bridge", then the 73rd st underpass. then repaving Fr. Caruso.

    2 + years

    After all that then maybe the put Friscati through.  ODOT and the contrator were asked about connecting E of 70th to 73rd.  Shrugs all around.  I would bet the house on not getting Fr. Caruso over on a bridge.   Now or ever.

    It will be Frascati or nothing.   I am worried that the walking path between 70 and 73 might get the axe at some point.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on August 08, 2013, 10:30:40 AM
    1 fun fact.

    They just repaved w. 70th all the way down to Fr. Caruso from Detroit.  Including ripping up and replacing the handicapped curb cuts/ramps that were perfectly serviceable and hadn't been there very long.

    Those and about 200-300 feet up 70th  from Fr. caruso will now be torn up for the sewer work.  In the grand scheme of things a small thing...but really? the city paving folks couldn't have saved 300 feet of asphalt time/materials and the curbs? 

    That is one of the small things that makes people really question their leaders.  not even 2 months after putting it down it is getting ripped out......like they didn't realize the multi year multi million dollar project was going to start a couple months later.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on August 08, 2013, 10:42:22 AM
    I thought to ask and then forgot to ask the guys at the meeting.

    Does anyone know where they will start/end the 30 foot shift?  there is a bridge around 58th and another across lake that limits how far east/west they can find 30 feet.  Will they use this entire distance?  will the trains have new signalling? what will the speed be on the temporary shift?  I have seen trains go by pretty darn fast, will they maintain that speed.

    I don't know that the guys at the meeting would even know the answers, there were no railroad people there, and the rail work wont be happening until next year
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on August 08, 2013, 10:55:24 AM
    I've seen the Amtrak train race by.  It was discussed in the kickoff meeting and it will definitely have to slow down...

    W. 70th is Zone's baby because the school is there.  Barely any use on that street, barely any residential, yet it was repaved?  Go figure.  Meanwhile 73rd near Detroit is like driving on the moon.  Ditto for most of 65th between Detroit & Caruso, much more traffic.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 08, 2013, 12:03:22 PM
    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Urban%20Ohio/thomasofftrack-s.jpg)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 08, 2013, 03:40:07 PM
    ^ITS the residents on 70th that want a bridge???  Yes those are the two options accoridng to Councilman Zone, who is framing it as ODOT gets to make the decision based on stuidies.  The bridge would be obsolete and terrible ideas.  Terrible urban planning, waste of money and will be underutilized.

    They are demo'ing 7202 eventually.  The only realistic option is to punch Frascati through. 

    From the feedback through the grapevine it was a few residents of those yellow houses on the east side of 70th who oppose a road coming in at a "T" opposite their places.        I can't see what the big deal is but ..... that's what I hear.


    Quote
    Dergon can back me up on this because I know he walks his dog there...from battery park east that track has not been used for anything (i have been there 3 yeas and not seen anything on those tracks)   and if you get down on ground level and walk it.. to my uneducated eye is currently unusable.  it is not flat and level the tracks are not true and perpendicular.  The Ballast is uneven.  the siding sits between 3 and 5 feet lower than the tracks.  and that 2 foot difference can be within a 100 foot run.

    It's definately rough there for sure.   There's the third track just south of the main two which is about 18" lower.  That is occasionally used for maintenence and spraying the weeds along the edge and the occasionally delivery to the warehouses at 78th. 


    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on August 08, 2013, 03:50:01 PM
    1 fun fact.

    They just repaved w. 70th all the way down to Fr. Caruso from Detroit.  Including ripping up and replacing the handicapped curb cuts/ramps that were perfectly serviceable and hadn't been there very long.

    Those and about 200-300 feet up 70th  from Fr. caruso will now be torn up for the sewer work.  In the grand scheme of things a small thing...but really? the city paving folks couldn't have saved 300 feet of asphalt time/materials and the curbs? 

    That is one of the small things that makes people really question their leaders.  not even 2 months after putting it down it is getting ripped out......like they didn't realize the multi year multi million dollar project was going to start a couple months later.

    Just like on Clifton, where they had to pour the handicap ramps, even though the sidewalks they lead to are so pitted and uneven because of tree limbs that no wheelchair could ever pass!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on August 08, 2013, 03:51:13 PM
    From a railroad perspective, the new tracks around the construction site (called a shoefly) is going to be difficult operationally. The railroad right of way climbs at a 0.8 percent grade from the bridge at the mouth of Cuyahoga River to near Triskett Road. Doesn't sound like much, but some longer, heavier trains really struggle to climb that grade. And adding track curvature to a grade increases the effective rate of gradient.

    It will also be interesting to see how Amtrak does through the shoefly. Amtrak's normal operating speed past Edgewater Park is 79 mph. That will be significantly reduced through the shoefly.

    What is the origin of the term "Shoefly?"   
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: metrocity on August 09, 2013, 02:20:52 AM
    Quote
    Including ripping up and replacing the handicapped curb cuts/ramps that were perfectly serviceable and hadn't been there very long.

    That seems to be happening a lot all over around where I live...perfectly decent looking old (stamped) concrete curb cuts/ramps getting ripped up and replaced.  The new ones have those bumpy blue or pink inserts that deteriorate really fast...within a couple of years and become loose.  I just figured it was the feds guidelines and they were paying for it...seems wasteful.  Especially since those inserts just seem to rot away fast.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 12, 2013, 12:15:13 PM
    Dergon can back me up on this because I know he walks his dog there...from battery park east that track has not been used for anything (i have been there 3 yeas and not seen anything on those tracks)   and if you get down on ground level and walk it.. to my uneducated eye is currently unusable.  it is not flat and level the tracks are not true and perpendicular.  The Ballast is uneven.  the siding sits between 3 and 5 feet lower than the tracks.  and that 2 foot difference can be within a 100 foot run.

    FYI, those things don't determine whether tracks have been used recently. They only determine what FRA class rating the track has -- which is Excepted for 10 mph or less with no hazardous materials allowed. I've seen trains use tracks in much worse condition than what's between Fr. Caruso and the two mainline tracks. Check the shade of rust on the top of the rail. If its the same color as the rust on the sides of the rail, it hasn't been used in years. If its lighter, its been used in weeks or months. And, of course, if the rail head is shiny, it's been used within the past day or day (depending on the last time there was precipitation/fog).

    What is the origin of the term "Shoefly?"   

    I have no idea. In fact, the term is actually spelled "Shoo-fly" or "Shoofly." Go figure. So I searched Google (as you could have) and here's the answer.....
    http://www.word-detective.com/2010/03/shoo-fly/ (http://www.word-detective.com/2010/03/shoo-fly/)

    And not all shooflies cause restricted train speeds. This one between Los Angeles and San Diego allowed Amtrak trains to stay close to their 90 mph max (in our area, it's 79 mph). Just in case you're wondering, these trains operate in push-pull mode, so sometimes the locomotives are pushing with the engineer seated in a cab at the end opposite of the train from the locomotive, FWIW). I wonder how the railroad shoofly will be designed for the West Shoreway.....

    Jeffrey Road Shoofly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YsxMwuw_W8#)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Foraker on August 12, 2013, 12:16:58 PM
    Quote
    “Shoo-fly” meaning “temporary bypass” first appeared in railroad jargon around 1905. The logic of this use is unclear, but I think it’s significant that around the same time “shoo-fly” was also being used to mean “a local or commuter train.”  My guess is that such trains, traveling slowly with frequent stops, were considered a rustic or “hick” mode of travel, likely to be carrying as many flies as human travelers (requiring passengers to constantly “shoo flies”).  Perhaps the “shoo-fly” name then broadened to mean bypasses from the main line where trains would have to slow down and, eventually, to any sort of bypass, even on a highway.

    http://www.word-detective.com/2010/03/shoo-fly/ (http://www.word-detective.com/2010/03/shoo-fly/)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 15, 2013, 03:07:39 PM
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewayAUgust14_2013_zps665122fb.jpg?t=1376599780)

    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewayAUgust14_2013_2_zpsadf2304e.jpg?t=1376599786)

    Two pics taken today.  The first looking North at Fr. Caruso at 69th from the South.  The second is taken along the railroad tracks looking West from 69th.  They've pulled up Father Caruso and built what looks to me like a temporary patch of road North of where the old street was (kind of partly using what would have been the North lan of Fr.Caruso and part of the grassy along the RR tracks).

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on August 24, 2013, 02:56:51 PM
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewayAugust242013_2_zps80d34db8.jpg)
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewayAugust242013_1_zps51c3752b.jpg)

    Pic one on Father Caruso looking West into Battery Park.  #2 Looking East.

    Just updates for fun.

    Father Caruso is now torn up all the way from 67th to 74th.  The old railroad offshoot tracks that used to head towards 73rd are all piled up.   
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jhonopolis on August 24, 2013, 03:05:46 PM
    Are there any renderings/master plans of this?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 24, 2013, 09:03:14 PM
    Father Caruso is now torn up all the way from 67th to 74th.  The old railroad offshoot tracks that used to head towards 73rd are all piled up.   

    Oh, you mean the spur? ;)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on August 25, 2013, 07:25:30 AM
    Are there any renderings/master plans of this?

    info here if you click & download the pdf's http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on August 28, 2013, 06:53:44 AM
    Interesting timing on this article, but it could just be business press chest-thumping?   What is involved in Phase II?

    Baker Selected for ODOT Lakefront West Phase II Design Contract

    CLEVELAND--(BUSINESS WIRE)--August 27, 2013--

    Michael Baker Jr., Inc., an engineering unit of Michael Baker Corporation (NYSE MKT:BKR), was awarded a one-year, $4.5 million roadway and structure design services contract by the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for Phase II of the Lakefront West project on U.S. Route 6 in Cleveland, Ohio.

    When completed, the Lakefront West Project will connect Cleveland's west-side neighborhoods with the lakefront by creating multi-modal connections along the West Shoreway. The project transforms a 2.5-mile, 50 mph freeway into a scenic, tree-lined, 35 mph boulevard. Specifically, Baker will provide detailed roadway and structures design, traffic certification and analysis, maintenance of traffic, traffic signal plans, drainage design, utility coordination and documentation, geotechnical review, final waterway permit and conceptual mitigation plan, project management and stakeholder meetings/coordination, landscaping and constructability reviews.

    The rest of the press release:


    http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130827-909544.html
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 28, 2013, 07:14:16 AM
    Interesting timing on this article, but it could just be business press chest-thumping?   What is involved in Phase II?


    Isn't that the 2.5-mile section described in the second paragraph?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on August 28, 2013, 07:17:08 AM
    Interesting timing on this article, but it could just be business press chest-thumping?   What is involved in Phase II?


    Isn't that the 2.5-mile section described in the second paragraph?

    I guess so, but I thought this had had been shot down during the ODOT collapse of 2012 (when they announced the second innerbelt bridge wouldn't be completed until our great great grandchildren were driving across it?)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on August 28, 2013, 07:28:13 AM
    Not at all. In fact, I'd been hearing from Cleveland city council members that this West Shoreway project would effectively extend the "Enhance Clifton" project (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html) east of the Lake Avenue intersection in terms of the landscaped median, transit stops along the roadway and a 35 mph speed. If they're going to do this, then I wish they would get rid of the interchange at Edgewater Park. Either do a boulevard or a highway but not both.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on August 28, 2013, 07:50:08 AM
    I keep hearing it's going to get done but I'm not certain about the money.

    I thought the money was supposed to come from the Turnpike funds disbursement and I don't think they got anything from that.

    Looks like they have enough loose change lying around for the plans, but the project is not funded yet.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on August 28, 2013, 07:53:10 AM
    Looks like they have enough loose change lying around for the plans, but the project is not funded yet.

    my take on this as well
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on August 28, 2013, 08:38:29 AM
    Not at all. In fact, I'd been hearing from Cleveland city council members that this West Shoreway project would effectively extend the "Enhance Clifton" project (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html) east of the Lake Avenue intersection in terms of the landscaped median, transit stops along the roadway and a 35 mph speed. If they're going to do this, then I wish they would get rid of the interchange at Edgewater Park. Either do a boulevard or a highway but not both.


    Agreed 110%.   At grade the entire way until the Main Ave Bridge.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 18, 2013, 07:55:34 AM
    2 cranes arrived this morning at the project site on 73rd & what's left of Caruso.  A helper crane erecting a larger crawler crane, will be used to start driving sheet piling...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gotribe on September 18, 2013, 08:38:58 AM
    I haven't been following this very closely.  Have they started on the Shoreway Conversion?  Is the construction referenced above in relation to the conversion?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on September 18, 2013, 08:41:07 AM
    I haven't been following this very closely.  Have they started on the Shoreway Conversion?  Is the construction referenced above in relation to the conversion?

    No the conversion has not started nor is it funded.

    The comments above reference the W 73rd interchange project that will link W73rd to Edgewater and the SHoreway via. car/bike/pedestrian ramps.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: biker16 on September 18, 2013, 10:08:11 AM
    this project is expected to receive funding from Turnpike bonds.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on September 18, 2013, 10:50:38 AM
    this project is expected to receive funding from Turnpike bonds.

    I see no funding from turnpike or acknowledgement from mayor of any funding.

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/turnpike_gives_final_stamp_to.html

    http://media.cleveland.com/plain_dealer_metro/other/turnpike.pdf

    http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2013/09/mayor_frank_jackson_plays_agai.html

    "Jackson marveled at views of downtown from Edgewater, where stately mansions overlook Lake Erie. He used the moment to plug his proposal to turn the West Shoreway, a short stretch of freeway connecting the neighborhood to downtown, into a boulevard. Doing so would open up new housing and commercial opportunities, Jackson asserted, paving the way for higher-income taxpayers to settle into coveted real estate.

    "We're catching a little flak, but we're going to make it happen," said Jackson, aware that residents there and in the northwestern suburbs dread the thought of a slower commute and that the project has not yet secured the funding needed to become reality."




    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 23, 2013, 11:38:24 AM
    Henry J. Gomez ‏@HenryJGomez 14m
    .@JohnKasich back in Cleveland tomorrow to announce West Shoreway plan with @FrankGJackson. It's one of Jackson's pet projects. #2014
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on September 23, 2013, 11:51:31 AM
    Go Frank Go!

    I like the way he's working on the Governor.

    Now if he could only convince him to give up some rail money!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 23, 2013, 12:01:39 PM
    Invitation for tomorrow's event:

    You are invited to attend a special celebration of
    Cleveland’s Lakefront West Project
    hosted by:
    Ohio Gov. John R. Kasich and
    Cleveland Mayor Frank G. Jackson
     
    Tuesday, September 24, 2013
    12:30 p.m.
     
    Upper Edgewater Park
    (Follow Cliff Dr. to the right just off West Blvd.)
    Cleveland, OH 44102
     
    The event will be held rain or shine.
    Parking is available at the park.
     
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on September 23, 2013, 12:38:26 PM
    Henry J. Gomez ‏@HenryJGomez 14m
    .@JohnKasich back in Cleveland tomorrow to announce West Shoreway plan with @FrankGJackson. It's one of Jackson's pet projects. #2014

    My fingers are crossed for something truly transformative.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on September 23, 2013, 12:45:15 PM
    Henry J. Gomez ‏@HenryJGomez 14m
    .@JohnKasich back in Cleveland tomorrow to announce West Shoreway plan with @FrankGJackson. It's one of Jackson's pet projects. #2014

    My fingers are crossed for something truly transformative.

    It's an election year for the mayor and next year is an election year for the Governor.  It may be big because if it's just a token effort that may not get these guys the impact they are looking for from this project.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on September 23, 2013, 01:17:15 PM
    Henry J. Gomez ‏@HenryJGomez 14m
    .@JohnKasich back in Cleveland tomorrow to announce West Shoreway plan with @FrankGJackson. It's one of Jackson's pet projects. #2014

    My fingers are crossed for something truly transformative.

    It's an election year for the mayor and next year is an election year for the Governor.  It may be big because if it's just a token effort that may not get these guys the impact they are looking for from this project.

    Kasich/Jackson 2014!!!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 23, 2013, 01:31:23 PM
    More...........

    http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=14743

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    September 23, 2013
    News Advisory

    Mayor Jackson and Gov. Kasich to Discuss New Plan to Complete the Lakefront West Project

    CLEVELAND – On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 at 12:30 p.m., Mayor Frank G. Jackson and Governor John Kasich will share details of a new funding plan to complete the Lakefront West Project.

    WHO: Mayor Frank G. Jackson
    Governor John Kasich, State of Ohio
    Other distinguished guests
    WHAT: Talk about new funding plan to complete the Lakefront West Project along Cleveland’s West Shoreway
    WHEN: Tuesday, September 24, 2013, 12:30 p.m.
    Please arrive by 12:15 p.m.
    WHERE: Upper Edgewater Park
    (Follow Cliff Drive to the right, just off of West Boulevard)
    Cleveland, OH 44102
    - 30 -
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: musky on September 23, 2013, 02:51:03 PM
    Henry J. Gomez ‏@HenryJGomez 14m
    .@JohnKasich back in Cleveland tomorrow to announce West Shoreway plan with @FrankGJackson. It's one of Jackson's pet projects. #2014

    My fingers are crossed for something truly transformative.

    It's an election year for the mayor and next year is an election year for the Governor.  It may be big because if it's just a token effort that may not get these guys the impact they are looking for from this project.

    Kasich/Jackson 2014!!!

     :drunk: :drunk: :drunk: :drunk: :drunk: :drunk:
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on September 23, 2013, 04:28:08 PM
    this project is expected to receive funding from Turnpike bonds.



    "Jackson marveled at views of downtown from Edgewater, where stately mansions overlook Lake Erie. He used the moment to plug his proposal to turn the West Shoreway, a short stretch of freeway connecting the neighborhood to downtown, into a boulevard. Doing so would open up new housing and commercial opportunities, Jackson asserted, paving the way for higher-income taxpayers to settle into coveted real estate.


    Interesting. I wonder if the plans really will allow for parcels to be developed along the new boulevard with driveways as Jackson hints. Or if this is just the same old shoreway with landscaped medians.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jeremyck01 on September 23, 2013, 04:31:18 PM
    I know that there are posters here on UO who have been very critical of Jackson, and I agree that there are things he could work on (it always drove me nuts how quiet he was all the time.  I feel a politician needs to be out talking about their ideas), but there has been more done in Cleveland under his watch to improve the city that any other mayor I can think of.  He gets planning, for the most part.  Yes, the casino issues leave a bad taste, but overall, he gets it.  Or at least the combination of Jackson/Fitzgerald gets it.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on September 23, 2013, 04:36:26 PM
    Some great historical images of the West Shoreway here:

    http://images.ulib.csuohio.edu/cdm/search/searchterm/bulkley!jpeg%20jpg!bulkley%20blvd/field/all!format!all/mode/all!any!all/conn/and!and!and/order/nosort/ad/asc

    Many places look identical today to the way it did in 1940. I wonder why pedestrian elements were left out way back then? It seems that would have been pretty much standard in that era.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 23, 2013, 04:42:55 PM
    I know that there are posters here on UO who have been very critical of Jackson, and I agree that there are things he could work on (it always drove me nuts how quiet he was all the time.  I feel a politician needs to be out talking about their ideas), but there has been more done in Cleveland under his watch to improve the city that any other mayor I can think of.  He gets planning, for the most part.  Yes, the casino issues leave a bad taste, but overall, he gets it.  Or at least the combination of Jackson/Fitzgerald gets it.

    A good discussion for this thread
    http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,28156.0.html
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: X on September 23, 2013, 10:57:00 PM
    Some great historical images of the West Shoreway here:

    http://images.ulib.csuohio.edu/cdm/search/searchterm/bulkley!jpeg%20jpg!bulkley%20blvd/field/all!format!all/mode/all!any!all/conn/and!and!and/order/nosort/ad/asc

    Many places look identical today to the way it did in 1940. I wonder why pedestrian elements were left out way back then? It seems that would have been pretty much standard in that era.

    That was near the beginning of it all.  The idea that everyone would drive everywhere was futuristic, and controlled access highways with no pedestrians allowed was the lynchpin of that future.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: X on September 23, 2013, 11:01:19 PM
    this project is expected to receive funding from Turnpike bonds.



    "Jackson marveled at views of downtown from Edgewater, where stately mansions overlook Lake Erie. He used the moment to plug his proposal to turn the West Shoreway, a short stretch of freeway connecting the neighborhood to downtown, into a boulevard. Doing so would open up new housing and commercial opportunities, Jackson asserted, paving the way for higher-income taxpayers to settle into coveted real estate.


    Interesting. I wonder if the plans really will allow for parcels to be developed along the new boulevard with driveways as Jackson hints. Or if this is just the same old shoreway with landscaped medians.

    Where's this hinted at now?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on September 24, 2013, 01:28:16 PM
    So, this is really, really going to happen?  Really?  (hopeful disbelief)

    State to cover $3 million of Cleveland's $7 million cost for West Shoreway's makeover

    By JAY MILLER

    http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20130924/FREE/130929923


    "The Lakefront West project, which city leaders struggled to fund for more than a decade, will bring the water closer for residents of the city's West Side neighborhoods. It will turn the 2.5-mile, 50-mph freeway between West Boulevard and the Main Avenue Bridge into a divided, tree-lined, 35-mph boulevard.

    It will eliminate several freeway interchanges and make it easier for West Side residents to cross the Shoreway and reach the lakefront.

    The mayor and the governor actually were unveiling phase two of the project. Already underway are tunnels under the roadway from the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood to Edgewater Park and a new, $35 million section of West 73rd Street that will extend the street under the Shoreway to Edgewater Park."
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: DeanSheen on September 24, 2013, 01:41:35 PM
    According to the article this is going for Phase II.

    Based on these documents, the biggest thing I see about phase II is the elimination of the Edgewater exit.

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/Projectupdate_022310_FINAL.pdf
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 24, 2013, 01:41:47 PM
    But will it get rid of the Edgewater Park interchange??
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Clefan98 on September 24, 2013, 01:53:09 PM
    West Shoreway conversion to boulevard with Lake Erie access gets funding, is set to begin in the spring

    CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A decade-long push to link Cleveland's West Side to the lakefront has the final piece of funding to complete the project.
    Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson and Gov. John Kasich held a news conference today at Edgewater Park overlooking  Lake Erie to announce $20 million in state funding to turn the Shoreway into a lower-speed, tree-lined boulevard. Construction on revamping the roadway is to start next spring.

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/west_shoreway_conversion_to_bo.html#incart_river_default
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Cleburger on September 24, 2013, 01:56:35 PM
    West Shoreway conversion to boulevard with Lake Erie access gets funding, is set to begin in the spring

    CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A decade-long push to link Cleveland's West Side to the lakefront has the final piece of funding to complete the project.
    Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson and Gov. John Kasich held a news conference today at Edgewater Park overlooking  Lake Erie to announce $20 million in state funding to turn the Shoreway into a lower-speed, tree-lined boulevard. Construction on revamping the roadway is to start next spring.

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/west_shoreway_conversion_to_bo.html#incart_river_default

    Wow amen!   That is one small step for Cleveland, one giant leap for our lakefront!

    Let the neighborhood connection begin!
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: musky on September 24, 2013, 02:13:45 PM
    Very glad to see this finally happening after over a decade of talk
    One of the good aspects of election year.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 24, 2013, 02:20:00 PM
    That Crains article is very confusing.  There are several portions of the Shoreway project, currently the 73rd interchange, and others proposed, only 1 of which is the actual boulevard conversion. 

    "Cleveland Councilman Matt Zone,whose ward encompasses about two-thirds of the  Shoreway,  recounted that he attended his first meeting on the long-percolating project in December 2001.

    As it became more of a reality, it helped spur some $500 million in development completed or underway in the near West Side -- projects driven in part by anticipation of better connections between neighborhoods and the lakefront, Zone said.


    I'd love to see an accounting recap of that $500 million quote...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: Htsguy on September 24, 2013, 02:37:37 PM
    ^I have been confused by this project from day one.  Maybe it is because it has changed over the years (or maybe not, I am just not sure) due to funding issues.

    My current confusion is over the "interchanges" (which in my mind don't equate to a 35 mph boulevard...but rather intersections would).  Crain's article states the project will eliminate several interchanges.   But I believed I asked many months ago and was told that the work on 73rd is actually the constuction of an interchange.  So which is it?  Are they building interchanges or eliminating them?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: ksonic99 on September 24, 2013, 03:12:36 PM
    The existing 73rd work will tie into the existing on/off ramp.

    The exit for edgewater.  Not sure what if anything will be reconfigured for phase II through X
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on September 25, 2013, 06:16:50 AM
    I have mixed feelings about this project. I want something new for this road, but I'm not sure a tree lined boulevard is the best idea.

    This road is known for iconic views of downtown Cleveland and sweeping panoramas of Lake Erie. Why then is planting trees which will ultimately block these views for pedestrians and cars alike lauded as such an improvement?

    It's ironic that one of the few roads in Cleveland that you wouldn't want to be tree lined will be getting tree lined.

    I wonder if anyone has explored other landscaping options that won't hinder views, but are still aesthetically pleasing? The tree lined palm tree boulevard works in warmer climates in enhancing views (tall slim trunks, no bushy branches), but how well does a tree lined boulevard work in northern climes when you want to enhance the views that already exist?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 25, 2013, 06:32:25 AM
    I wouldn't worry about the trees.  I doubt they'll be planted closely enough to block any views.  After a few years, the canopy will be up high enough that it won't block a driver's view of the lake or downtown from a car seat.

    Last time I checked, there was a huge component of this project that reconfigured the interchange at W25th & W28th.  It was going to have all traffic get on & off at 28th, creating a nice development opportunity for the wasted space at 25th, and eliminating the dangerous on-ramp at 28th which merges from the left.  I haven't seen anything about this interchange, and in a previous meeting, someone from ODOT stated this was a higher priority than the actual boulevard conversion...
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 25, 2013, 06:35:24 AM
    I think a tree-lined boulevard is a great thing. Coming down the hill from Lake Avenue will preserve the vistas, as will the many turns east of the Westinghouse Curve.

    Now if we could just get rid of that bridge past Browns stadium....
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: WestBLVD on September 25, 2013, 07:03:51 AM
    I think a tree-lined boulevard is a great thing. Coming down the hill from Lake Avenue will preserve the vistas, as will the many turns east of the Westinghouse Curve.

    Now if we could just get rid of that bridge past Browns stadium....

    Good point, there are slight, but noticeable elevation changes around some of those curves which will preserve some views. The trees will make for some better framing in spots for sure, and some areas will have blocked views. Give and take I suppose.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on September 25, 2013, 07:05:40 AM
    Is there going to be any traffic calming?  Will there be any intersections?  If you keep a wide road with no intersections (only freeway interchanges), how do you expect people to not still go 60 MPH?  They won't be able to write enough tickets to slow people down.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: jam40jeff on September 25, 2013, 07:08:02 AM
    I think a tree-lined boulevard is a great thing. Coming down the hill from Lake Avenue will preserve the vistas, as will the many turns east of the Westinghouse Curve.

    Now if we could just get rid of that bridge past Browns stadium....

    Good point, there are slight, but noticeable elevation changes around some of those curves which will preserve some views. The trees will make for some better framing in spots for sure, and some areas will have blocked views. Give and take I suppose.

    I think the views are more interesting when they're only available sometimes.  You come over a hill or peek between trees and "wow, there's downtown" rather than it just always being in view.  Kind of like approaching Cincinnati from the south on I75/71, or coming through a tunnel to downtown Pittsburgh from the west.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 25, 2013, 07:14:37 AM
    here is the "plan" 

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Pages/default.aspx

    always subject to change.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 25, 2013, 07:21:41 AM
    This is how W. 73rd will tie into the shoreway

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/86481_Renderings.pdf
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 25, 2013, 07:37:53 AM
    This is how W. 73rd will tie into the shoreway

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/86481_Renderings.pdf

    Wow, that's unfortunate. It's pretty obvious this road is a compromise between two sides who could not win the argument : "Should it be a boulevard or a freeway?" So.... "Gosh, how about both," said some bureaucrat we'll probably never meet.

    As the old saying goes, "A camel is a thoroughbred designed by a government committee."
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 25, 2013, 07:54:51 AM
    Well that was when the funding wasn't there for the rest of it.

    It almost seems a shame to destroy that bridge, overpass, underpass?  even if/when a BLVD.  that thing is built like the Romans did it, too outlast the empire.  It looks like the bridges/overpasses/underpasses along MLK through the cultural gardens.

    So even when/if it becomes a 35 MPH tree lined BLVD it might be nice.  The road will still be as wide as Clifton, no?  The fewer traffic lights necessary the better I think.  I say this as somebody who lives directly above this on the bluff.

    The pedestrian underpasses they did at Lake/76th/65th, what they are doing with 73rd means the first actual intersection (if it becomes one) will be at W. 54th. 

    Even with the 35 MPH speed limit I don't see any real impediment to speed before 54th st.  The real test will come when then turn over the land East of that Over pass between the bluff and the road to a developer.  If you google map it and zoom in, there is a chunk of land between there and the Westinghouse building that will be developed sooner or later.  Once those driveways/entrance onto the shoreway exist you might see a traffic light around 65th or so.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: punch on September 25, 2013, 07:57:31 AM
    Its an improvement.  I don't think it will be successful as a boulevard until there are at grade intersections.  If I had to pick one, I would say W. 65th and the shoreway would be awesome.

    But, the real estate in Ohio City is some of the most expensive in the city.  Removing exit ramps, even a few, is a step in the right direction.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on September 25, 2013, 07:57:40 AM
    That's the best that could be done from an engineering standpoint.  The major obstacle is the 8' diameter sewer line that runs parallel to the tracks.  They are relocating it as much as they can to get the interchange at 73rd.  The ideal location for the interchange would have been 65th, since it's already a main artery in the neighborhood and connects right at the heart of Gordon Square, but the north termination of 65th is the main hub of the sewer line which connects the neighborhood & continues on to the treatment plant.  Relocating that hub is not an option.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on September 25, 2013, 08:33:08 AM
    This is how W. 73rd will tie into the shoreway

    http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Documents/86481_Renderings.pdf

    Wow, that's unfortunate. It's pretty obvious this road is a compromise between two sides who could not win the argument : "Should it be a boulevard or a freeway?" So.... "Gosh, how about both," said some bureaucrat we'll probably never meet.

    As the old saying goes, "A camel is a thoroughbred designed by a government committee."

    Like you I really did not want off/on ramps, but this is looking alright to me, at least aesthetically.

    Anyhow, just look north of that red square aka "Edgewater Link." What a nightmare that entrance to Edgewater Park is. Fixing that confusing bottleneck is going to be imperative.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 25, 2013, 08:41:55 AM
    Do you mean North of the shoreway or south?

    North would be perfect for a roundabout.  If anybody in this town knew how to use them.

    I traverse the one near Steelyard and the one on MLK near the Veterans hospital.

    People just do not get what to do.   The worst are the people who get into the roundabout then stop.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on September 25, 2013, 08:47:28 AM
    Do you mean North of the shoreway or south?

    North would be perfect for a roundabout.  If anybody in this town knew how to use them.

    I traverse the one near Steelyard and the one on MLK near the Veterans hospital.

    People just do not get what to do.   The worst are the people who get into the roundabout then stop.

    North of the Shoreway, you can see how confusing the entrance to/inside the Park is. Cars often just sit there frozen, unsure of where to go, creating a danger for other drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Maybe better signage is the real issue? But I've often seen cars go in the wrong direction or even pull onto the pedestrian path.

    In San Diego they installed roundabouts along the beach route (La Jolla). It took a few years for drivers to get used to it, but they function beautifully now.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 25, 2013, 09:46:43 AM
    As overpasses go, it's a decent looking overpass with the stonework and all. But I think an intersection here would be good. My interest comes from the possibility of having the #55 local buses (not the Flyers) make stops along the Shoreway after it is converted to a boulevard. Unless the buses come down the ramps, bus stops won't be possible here. And Edgewater Park and Battery Park are two significant traffic generators for transit that aren't being served right now, and may not be due to the way this project is designed.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: 8ShadesofGray on September 25, 2013, 10:11:33 AM
    Last time I checked, there was a huge component of this project that reconfigured the interchange at W25th & W28th.  It was going to have all traffic get on & off at 28th, creating a nice development opportunity for the wasted space at 25th, and eliminating the dangerous on-ramp at 28th which merges from the left. 

    To me, this was the most disappointing part of the whole proposed conversion. IIRC (and I could be wrong here ... it's been a while!), it proposed demolishing several buildings at the northeast corner of West 28th and Detroit for expanded traffic flow off of the Shoreway. The particular property at the corner, Linda's Superette, has been considered by many to be a nuisance property, which I think reduced people's anxiety about demo.

    That said, this is basically removing traffic from West 25th, which would support future speculative development where two large surface lots currently sit, and increase traffic at an intersection directly adjacent to an extremely active nightclub and several high-density residential buildings. For public housing residents down the hill, this also seems problematic as the Shoreway's swoop to the northeast and the higher-density tower being adjacent to West 28th makes West 28th a more logical pedestrian corridor than the West 25th side. And all of this happening right at a time when Hingetown storefronts, arts spaces and residential rehab are poised to make this a much more pedestrian-oriented part of Ohio City. It just seems really perplexing to me ... Again, if I've recalled all the details correctly :)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 25, 2013, 10:14:00 AM
    I think they could put a bus stop where 73rd comes down and ties into the "off ramp" that wont be one anymore.

    Start with 1 stop there. 

    Then maybe another at 54th  and then at 33-38 where the shoreway almost touches detroit (or 45th, wherever they put an intersection) so people can transfer.   more than 1 or 3 I don't think are necessary.  W. 25th already has multiple buses, no need for a stop there, especially with the real highway like on/off ramps you are still going to have, that is where the "highway" will now start.  Unless you send some (or all) of the 55's over the D/S bridge into downtown.  55S and 55D?


    I cant see more than 3, and I would start with just the 1,  needed between the entrance at lake and the Main avenue bridge.   It would be nice if at 73rd there was some sort of indicator to notify the driver that he/she needs to pick up there.  No need to exit if there is nobody getting on/off.

    I do think RTA needs to extend the 55 (or something else) during evening weekends so that people can access the park.  Have the 55 run at least hourly.  It is a good mile from Detroit/65th to get down to the park itself.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: surfohio on September 25, 2013, 10:19:52 AM
    I do think RTA needs to extend the 55 (or something else) during evening weekends so that people can access the park.  Have the 55 run at least hourly.  It is a good mile from Detroit/65th to get down to the park itself.

    Excellent. As the park becomes more of a destination this could help out a lot.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 25, 2013, 10:27:26 AM
    I think a tree-lined boulevard is a great thing. Coming down the hill from Lake Avenue will preserve the vistas, as will the many turns east of the Westinghouse Curve.

    Now if we could just get rid of that bridge past Browns stadium....

    Good point, there are slight, but noticeable elevation changes around some of those curves which will preserve some views. The trees will make for some better framing in spots for sure, and some areas will have blocked views. Give and take I suppose.

    I think the views are more interesting when they're only available sometimes.  You come over a hill or peek between trees and "wow, there's downtown" rather than it just always being in view.  Kind of like approaching Cincinnati from the south on I75/71, or coming through a tunnel to downtown Pittsburgh from the west.

    Even with thick trees in Edgewater Park, there are vistas.....

    (http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb90/Peepersk/Clevelandpics1/Edgewater5s.jpg) (http://s208.photobucket.com/user/Peepersk/media/Clevelandpics1/Edgewater5s.jpg.html)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: archangel on September 25, 2013, 11:29:22 AM
    Last time I checked, there was a huge component of this project that reconfigured the interchange at W25th & W28th.  It was going to have all traffic get on & off at 28th, creating a nice development opportunity for the wasted space at 25th, and eliminating the dangerous on-ramp at 28th which merges from the left. 

    To me, this was the most disappointing part of the whole proposed conversion. IIRC (and I could be wrong here ... it's been a while!), it proposed demolishing several buildings at the northeast corner of West 28th and Detroit for expanded traffic flow off of the Shoreway. The particular property at the corner, Linda's Superette, has been considered by many to be a nuisance property, which I think reduced people's anxiety about demo.

    That said, this is basically removing traffic from West 25th, which would support future speculative development where two large surface lots currently sit, and increase traffic at an intersection directly adjacent to an extremely active nightclub and several high-density residential buildings. For public housing residents down the hill, this also seems problematic as the Shoreway's swoop to the northeast and the higher-density tower being adjacent to West 28th makes West 28th a more logical pedestrian corridor than the West 25th side. And all of this happening right at a time when Hingetown storefronts, arts spaces and residential rehab are poised to make this a much more pedestrian-oriented part of Ohio City. It just seems really perplexing to me ... Again, if I've recalled all the details correctly :)

    Just noting that the reason some believe Linda's is a nuisance is likely because people from the Lakeview projects gather outside, park haphazardly on the street, cross against the light, and generally loiter - and none of this should be surprising, because it is literally the only walkable mini-grocery anywhere near the projects and can only be reached by walking along a street that barely has sidewalks. Lakeview is horribly located and cut off from everything. So, this is a consequence of terrible planning and people just having nowhere else to go.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: CBC on September 25, 2013, 12:09:54 PM
    West Shoreway conversion to boulevard with Lake Erie access gets funding, is set to begin in the spring

    CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A decade-long push to link Cleveland's West Side to the lakefront has the final piece of funding to complete the project.
    Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson and Gov. John Kasich held a news conference today at Edgewater Park overlooking  Lake Erie to announce $20 million in state funding to turn the Shoreway into a lower-speed, tree-lined boulevard. Construction on revamping the roadway is to start next spring.

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/west_shoreway_conversion_to_bo.html#incart_river_default


    (Shakes head) Why is there a picture of North Harbor and the Browns Stadium with this article?
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: CBC on September 26, 2013, 10:19:42 AM
    So I really like the roundabout idea for W.73 after driving by there over the last couple of days. if it's not going to be at grade, the left/right turns off the shoreway could be a disaster. That would be a great solution.


    Does this project make the old train depot across from Edgewater a develop-able piece of property? If so, dibs on it.  Do any of the project presentations show which parcels of land would be opened up by this. I've been trying to figure that out as I drive through there.

    One other general question, why don't we use more multi-function stop lights and lane turn restrictions around here. Seems to me that lights along Clifton/shoreway that are flashing yield/stop and right turn only at the minor intersections during rush hour would help with congestion, but calm traffic the other 20 hrs of the day.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 26, 2013, 10:48:15 AM
    I cant find the map I saw it on.  But the 2 most notable sections were at w. 25th and the land between the highway under/overpass and the Westinghouse building below the bluff...that area is 1/2? 2/3rds? the same size? as battery park.

    If they put the highway at grade it opens all the way from the W. 76th tunnel to the Westinghouse building.

    I would make that phase XX after the Eastern part is developed. 
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: kennybabes on September 26, 2013, 11:07:42 AM
    go here

    http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/iactive/flash/

    Click on "the Plan"  5th option from the left in the header band.

    Click on West Development detail  You can then slide the map around.

    It looks like the area around the old train station is slated for future development... At least in the mind of whomever drew up this map.

    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: CBC on September 26, 2013, 11:40:39 AM
    ^Those were stables, not a train station. Who knew? According to the map, it says renovate historic stables.


    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: KJP on September 26, 2013, 05:23:05 PM
    ^Those were stables, not a train station. Who knew? According to the map, it says renovate historic stables.


    I did. :)
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: CBC on September 26, 2013, 07:29:43 PM
    Of course you did....
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on September 30, 2013, 06:31:59 AM
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewaySeptember30_2013_zps4e3da1c9.jpg)

    Pile driving starting today at 69th and Father Caruso.   It's thumpy down here.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: dergon darkhelm on October 12, 2013, 08:49:39 AM
    (http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p291/Dergon_Darkhelm/ShorewayOct11_2013_zps6aa982f6.jpg)

    The pile driving is as close to my front door as is it is going to get.  It's like a mini-earthquake all day long (at least from 8am-4pm). Looking forward to them moving on westward and out of my direct field of view.
    Title: Re: Cleveland: Shoreway Boulevard Conversion
    Post by: gottaplan on October 12, 2013, 11:46:53 AM
    super noisy too.&nb