I'm really looking for some insight on this issue, so if anyone can help (beyond just discussing) I'd love to hear thoughts and examples as to why...

 

In another post I discussed the City of New Orleans and how it has some qualities that I think Cleveland could really benefit from.  One was the narrower streets.  Using google earth I determined that there are apparently 2 street widths throughout downtown and residential New Orleans.

 

They seem to require smaller streets to be 20 feet wide (1 lane of parking, and 2 lanes for driving) and bigger city streets are 30 feet wide.  Any of the boulevards in the city are made up of either two 20 foot roads which a median or two 30 foot roads, this means that at no time would a pedestrian need to cross 4 or more lanes of traffic.  I also noticed that one both weekdays and weekends there was no gridlock, and little traffic. 

 

 

My question is why, then, does Cleveland have 70'+ wide avenues like Superior, St Clair, Chester, Prospect, and even streets like W6th are 55 feet wide which have 2 lanes of parking and then 3 more lanes for driving.  W9th has 2 lanes of parking and then 4 lanes for driving. 

 

My first question is does anyone know how this came to be?  Historically roads were narrower in older cities, so clearly at some point in our history they were widened (perhaps some to support street cars), and left that way.  But I don't understand why we need to keep them so wide now.  If anything it's a HUGE opportunity for Cleveland to have beautiful wide streets capes providing space for cafes and restaurants. 

 

Is the discussion over the public square redesign a lot of people mentioned closing off the square and requiring traffic to circulate around it.  Most people seemed confident (and I agree) that Cleveland does not have the kind of traffic to mandate ultra wide streets everywhere.  We also have plenty of parking....

 

It seems to me that Cleveland has been far-too-long run by people that act like Robert Moses and simply believe massive roads and parking at every corner is the ideal "city".  Below is a picture I submit as a crude but reasonable image of a narrower pedestrian friendly W6th.  I submit it and request that others explain their support or dissent from moving toward narrower streets, especially in the WHD.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as the warehouse district, I would say it was due to tractor trailor traffic that was occuring along there in it's warehousing hayday.

 

As far as the other streets such as Euclid, Superior, and St. Clair, I would have to say that those are wide due to them being state routes, and therefore main thoroughfares prior to the interstates and freeways. 

Cleveland is a newer city. That's why the streets are wider.

 

Look at Cincinnati and you will find more narrow streets, like NOLA.

 

I don't think you will find many here who would not support narrower streets. You have to ask yourself, though, what you want to do with the space. You can't just push the buildings out further and give them bigger courtyards! Sometimes wider sidewalks is a good idea. Other times bike lanes/paths, BRT, or even streetcars would be better options. Just narrowing the streets and adding lots of sidewalk space everywhere seems kind of crazy to me.

 

Then of course there are the political issues you will inevitably face.

There was a strong push to widen the streets here, due to traffic congestion, around the turn of the (last) century.  It was discussed at the 1912 Ohio constitutional convention as an eminent domain issue.  One delegate thought property owners should actually pay to have their lots shrunken for road expansion, because they would be the direct beneficiaries of the reduced gridlock. 

 

The problem derives from the shape of the city and is common to Great Lakes ports.  Most cities are more or less round, with downtown in the middle.  Cleveland isn't, so compared to a round city of equal size, there is less area in which to spread the same amount of traffc flow.  Chicago and Milwaukee have similarly wide streets for the same reason.  But due to topography and water boundaries, it was especially bad here.  Look at the east side and how it constricts as you approach downtown. 

 

Also consider that most of these streets once had trolleys on them, which split them down the middle and made them seem less vast.

There are some pretty wide streets in New Orleans as well. Off the top of my head, Canal, Elysian Fields, Carrolton, Poydras, Tulane, and Claiborne, are all 3 lanes wide in each direction

I think you need to separate two aspects to this: wide public rights of way and wide roadways within the rights of way.  Cleveland's wide public rights of way predate autos by decades and often reflect the original 19th century platting, NOT any subsequent widenings.  I once heard Hunter Morrison say they were laid out that wide so a horse wagon could do a U-turn, but who knows why.

 

As for wide roadways: I guess the short answer is that the rights of way are so freaking wide that there's room for wide (or at least average) sidewalks and wide roadways, so that's been the default. One exception is Tremont where streets like W5th and W7th have normal roadway widths but enormously wide tree lawns to fill all that right of way.

 

 

@Punch -- Though there are some 3 lane roads like that, if you look at a map of New Orleans' Central Business District all the way through uptown and then to Audobon Park you'll find the standard street grid has narrow streets, and some boulevards with narrow 2 lane roads on either side of the boulevard.

 

You'll also notice that the street blocks are smaller in general and consistent.  Jane Jacobs argued in favor of smaller blocks and narrower streets because they favor the pedestrian. 

 

As part of the Vision for Cleveland put forward by the Group Plan there was a clear effort to make it more tourist friendly which I think is essential.  The reality is that walking from Tower City to the Flats East Bank, up to the Mall, over to E 9th and then up to Euclid is not only a long walk, but also one with vast surface lots, wide streets that favor speeding cars, and areas with little to no activity.

 

I think some of these wider roads can be altered to incorporate lanes for bikes, but all told, I think wider sidewalks that incorporate Newstands, offer public areas for resting, and space for Cafe's to build out could be really useful. 

How about narrowing the streets by adding trees like Chicago did

 

 

 

 

 

^^ and ^I'd definitely be on board with some bike lanes and targeted roadway narrowing.  You probably know, but the segment of the WHD you included in your photos, Burnham, was subject to a quick and cheap narrowing just last year in an effort to better accomodate the sidewalk cafes and pedestrians.  Happened absurdly fast and didn't cost much, If remember right.

 

I'd also be delighted if we could narrow the western end of the Detroit Superior bridge. From two westbound lanes, do we really need two left hand turn lanes a straight lane and a right turn lane?  It's always such a bummer to enjoy that widened northern promenade on the bridge until it take you to that intersection...

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Cleveland,+OH&aq=0&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=44.744674,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Cleveland,+Cuyahoga,+Ohio&ll=41.491621,-81.706599&spn=0.001306,0.00327&t=h&z=19 

I think a big reason is because Cleveland is basically a city of Main Streets. Think about it, Prospect, Euclid, Superior, St. Clair, Lakeside, as well as Ontario and East 9th. Our thinner streets are mostly just walls of parking garages, which adds no character and gives no reason for pedestrian activity.

 

East 4th is basically the only strong block still in tact that had a thin street (Even though its no longer open to vehicular traffic.) East 6th has potential, but the Fifth Third parking garage is really handicapping it. Vincent is all parking garages as well.

 

I think East 6th and and Vincent could really be something neat if they could be redone. Their thin streets and the heights of the surrounding buildings really could give a good vibe to the area. It would act as a good connector to Euclid, East 9th and Superior. If the Fifth Third garage could be demolished and replaced with a building/buildings with good frontage on both East 6th and Vincent, and the PNC garage demolished/reshaped to allow a building to front Vincent, this area could easily become one of the best spots in the city.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=41.5008,-81.689132&spn=0.003849,0.009645&t=k&z=17&msid=214307218223262897576.00049ea627a3ed488d5d5

 

Here is a link for more detail and a better look

http://tinyurl.com/4qpwh5v

 

a quick answer would be that daniel burnham was allowed to design streets

Also, the entire city was developed as an east / west city.  Until the 1950's the steel mills in Cuyahoga Heights were basically the southern edge of the metro population.  There aren't many north/south streets that are considered main thoroughfares outside of Ontario, E9th, E55th, E105th, W25th, West Blvd. W117th

Thanks for all the thoughts/facts/conjecture!

 

So in general people seem to agree we could do with bike lanes, widened tree/garden lawns.  What's the general feeling out there on perhaps limiting a couple of lanes off of Saint Clair, Superior maybe Prospect as you get closer.

 

I'm very much a Pedestrians > Cars, policy oriented person, but I think this is bigger than that.  Until we start enacting policies that favor public transit and pedestrians Cleveland cannot hope to move forward on building a walkable downtown.  Walkable streets mean narrower streets that are multi-modal and have unique and interesting streetscapes.  I really like the picture of what Chicago did.

 

Check out these ideas for mitigating traffic near bike lanes: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10300289?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com&nclick_check=1

 

For those who recall the Group Plans  "red carpet" that would cross Superior from the Arcade to the Mall, I would argue that while that is a good idea, it still does not make the street more pedestrian friendly, rather it just makes a bold crosswalk available. 

 

 

Lastly, again on the NOLA streets, I was staying at the Lafayette Hotel, when I walked outside I was facing a main avenue (their Euclid Ave, sort of) Saint Charles Avenue.  directly in front of me was a 2 lane road with an occasional wider stretch in front of some hotels for valet and drop off.  The street was calm and easy to cross.  Even if there is sparse traffic on Superior, it is a lot more imposing to cross.

 

The below picture shows this street (notice the street car line in the left lane!)  This is not a unique street in downtown but how most of the East/West roads run.  You can see, in the background, skyscrapers and a park to the right -- this is immediately downtown.  Just putting this out there to show how the streets could look.

 

To my knowledge, Cleveland's streets were never widened. I'm pretty sure most were designed that way circa 1800. Look at the oldest known photographs of the city, and even some of the artists' drawings in the early 1800s. The main streets (Superior, Euclid, Ontario, St. Clair, West 3rd, West 6th, West 9th etc) in the city were designed with 100-foot-wide rights of way. Lest you forget, the city's pre-Civil War downtown area was the warehouse district. The areas east of Public Square were heavily residential.

I've been thinking lately, and Cleveland isn't really that walkable of a city. The warehouse district is almost separated from the rest of downtown. Superior almost gives no reason to walk there, Public Square doesn't really have any strong pedestrian use. East 9th is all towers with no real reason to venture down it. Ontario is pretty useless and the Malls are surrounded by the backs of government buildings. As I said in the previous post, most of our side streets are just parking garages which is not pedestrian friendly.

 

Honestly, really our only streets that actually have potential to be pedestrian friendly are Euclid, Prospect, and parts Huron. I think the city should focus on these streets and do the best they can to make them more pedestrian friendly, like requiring street level retail spaces.

 

Euclid is by far our most pedestrian friendly street, but it still has a lot of work. The section between East 9th and Playhouse Square has a lot of work to be done but could easily become the best stretch if done properly. Euclid Avenue between Public Square and East 9th is doing good, but filling in the retail spaces(which I know isn't easy) would really improve the area. Also the lot next to 668 needs to be filled in with a pedestrian friendly building.

 

Prospect, although improved from the past, still needs a lot of work. To many empty lots and empty storefronts. Still, it has tons of potential(less if that block is demolished for a parking garage).

 

Here is a map of what I believe are/could become, Cleveland healthiest, most pedestrian friendly streets.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=41.499771,-81.687384&spn=0.015396,0.038581&t=k&z=15&msid=214307218223262897576.00049eb2dd405a9c02854

 

Link to larger version of map

http://tinyurl.com/49msbr7

 

Spend a weekend in Houston, then Cleveland becomes a pedestrian mecca

I'd agree with ClevelandOhio on the walkability of the city.  A big issue is also the size of our city blocks.  The blocks in the WHD are as much as 500'x330' which is more than double what Urbanists have often considered walkable/pedestrian friendly.

 

Take a look at this: http://www.spsu.edu/architecture/classes/4116_Shpuza/assigned%20readings/jacobs%201961%20need%20for%20small%20blocks.pdf

 

We have so many surface parking lots in there, we should really encourage any future development to be required to split up those enormous blocks.

I dont know what I think about smaller blocks. I think Euclid Avenue as an advantage for basically being one enormous block because it makes for less street crossing. You can basically walk all the way from Public Square to East 9th with out having to wait to cross a street.

 

I could see West 4th continuing all the way to Superior though. That would create nice neighborhood feel.

 

Edit: Actually I feel it necessary. It would create 4 decent sized blocks with a + intersection of all thin streets. It has so much potential to be great.

^Euclid is also broken up with the arcades, so pedestrian circulation (during business hours) is more flexible than the street pattern indicates.

 

Regarding walkability generally: the city only has direct control over the ROW allocation and streetscape design.  I'd say for Euclid (and even for Prospect and Huron), it's more or less done the basics well enough.  The lack of retail and other street-level amenities/destinations is a much bigger discussion and a much harder nut to crack.

 

It's a common observation, but the perception of roadway width is sometimes different from reality.  One reason why Carenegie seems so bleak and wide and car-dominated (at least to me) is because there's no parallel parking to shield pedestrians from the travel lanes.  Similarly, I think the Clinic majorly screwed up by not accommodating more parallel parking on the stretch of Euclid that runs through its campus.

 

ClevelandOhio, I agree with you completely about E6th and Short Vincent.  Would be awesome to see that streets transformed someday.

^Good point about the arcades. Euclid Avenue has good access to surrounding streets without being chopped up and without a million intersections that can make walking unbearable if you have to wait every 10 seconds to cross a street.

^I actually find NYC's super-short N/S block lengths incredibly annoying when trying to walk somewhere fast because of all the red lights you inevitably run into.  Though at the same time, it can be perilous trying to cross one of the crazily long E/W blocks mid-block.

    For a good background on why some town planners made the streets so wide, I recommend "City of Tommorow" by LeCorbusier. Basicly, as cities expanded into large cities (LeCorbusier called them Great Cites and noted that Great Cities have only been around since about 1700,) the older cores were found to be congested. So, towns began to be laid out with wide streets from the beginning. The problem is that some streets were laid out to be TOO wide.

 

 

Streets can be very narrow indeed and still be functional.

Then there's York, England....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,14643.msg237708.html#msg237708

 

Unfortunately this is what too many of our thin streets look like

 

 

http://tinyurl.com/5r5c46h

 

Yep. No doorways to various uses along those sidewalks. Nothing above the parking decks. It's like a tunnel with no roof. Very imposing, scary and anti-pedestrian.

 

Stark's vision for the Warehouse District was a good -- street-level retail/restaurants, several levels of parking above, and then X number of floors of housing, offices, hotels, etc. above that.

 

But at least Walnut Avenue is narrow to allow that kind of vision. Same with Vincent and East 6th.

When I saw this thread, I vaguely remembered reading about the reasons for the width of Euclid, Superior, etc, so I did some research and found these bits of info:

 

regarding the layout of Cleveland as planned in the 1790's: "The square was divided by Ontario Street, which ran north and south and was 90 feet wide. The east-west street, Superior, was 40 feet wider than Ontario because it led to the riverbank, where most of the river and lake traffic was expected to come into town."  (excerpt from Cleveland: A Concise History, 1796-1996 2nd edition, by Carol Poh Miller and Robert A. Wheeler.)

 

(Does anyone know if the current street width footage?)

 

regarding the width of Euclid Avenue later, in the 1800's: "The vision that took shape on the Avenue, first voiced by residents as early as 1855, was 'a continuous avenue of shade running like the Boulevards of Brussels ... a drive and a promenade of about 5 miles.' Armed with an irrepressible vision from their European grand tour travels, the Avenue's patrons sustained their dream of a grand boulevard through the early 1870's, to 'make Euclid Avenue the finest thoroughfare in the world.'² The strongest push by private citizens to make the Avenue the spine of a city-sponsored boulevard scheme occurred in the mid 1890's, but it too ultimately failed." (excerpt from Euclid Avenue: A Linear Neighborhood of Grandeur by Jan Cigliano.  link: http://www.case.edu/artsci/wrss/documents/Cigliano_000.pdf)

 

So essentially, the widths were established first to serve commercial purposes, then later to establish a Euro-style boulevard.

^ Compare to Paris, where the boulevards were CUT through areas that were already built up, not laid out through open land.