As somebody who lives in Tremont and works Downtown, a ped/bike route on the Innerbelt would create a significantly shorter commute. Presently, my choices are either to:

1. Zig-zag from W. 14th west across a narrow Abbey Ave. to an even narrower W. 20th then east across the Lorain Carnegie to Ontario (which is another awful road for cyclists).

2. Shoot down Literary Hill to W. 3rd, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the W. 3rd Bridge (which is being maintained presently anyway), then hump it up Commercial Hill (which will be eliminated by the new Innerbelt Bridge anyway).

3. Shoot down University to Scranton, take the bumpy and extremely bumpy ride to Carter Road, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the Carter Road bridge, then go to Old River and hump it up St. Clair.

 

The argument has never been an either/or as ODOT wants us to believe, but one of basic fairness and connectivity. ODOT had a responsibility to make a reasonable analysis of bike and ped connections, which it didn't do until the last minute. And when they finally looked at it, they said it would cost $40 million to add the bike and ped connection. $40 million to a bridge that is estimated to cost less than $290 million.

 

Words fail me.

 

I don't live in Tremont, but could see all of your points just from riding in the area.  A weather-protected, well-lit walk/bilkeway would do wonders for the marketability of the neighborhood to former suburbanites.

^^I don't think anyone is AGAINST it.  I have not seen any comments of that nature.... at least not on this board.  It's more indifference I would say.  For multiple reasons, even if I lived in Tremont, I probably would not use it.  That said, if they want to put bike/ped lanes on the second bridge, you surely won't hear any complaints coming from this corner.

As somebody who lives in Tremont and works Downtown, a ped/bike route on the Innerbelt would create a significantly shorter commute. Presently, my choices are either to:

1. Zig-zag from W. 14th west across a narrow Abbey Ave. to an even narrower W. 20th then east across the Lorain Carnegie to Ontario (which is another awful road for cyclists).

2. Shoot down Literary Hill to W. 3rd, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the W. 3rd Bridge (which is being maintained presently anyway), then hump it up Commercial Hill (which will be eliminated by the new Innerbelt Bridge anyway).

3. Shoot down University to Scranton, take the bumpy and extremely dusty ride to Carter Road, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the Carter Road bridge, then go to Old River and hump it up St. Clair.

 

The argument has never been an either/or as ODOT wants us to believe, but one of basic fairness and connectivity. ODOT had a responsibility to make a reasonable analysis of bike and ped connections, which it didn't do until the last minute. And when they finally looked at it, they said it would cost $40 million to add the bike and ped connection. $40 million to a bridge that is estimated to cost less than $290 million.

 

Words fail me.

 

[EDIT: By the bye, as I ride over the Lorain Carnegie, although the speed limit is 35 mph, cars regularly drive 50+ mph, and there is no protection for cyclists whatsoever. A separated lane on the Innerbelt Bridge would have been much, much safer, even at highway speeds.]

 

Thank you.  As a fellow Tremonter and active cyclist, you said it perfectly.

There is no reason that the westbound bridge should not have a pedestrian/cyclist lane when it gets built in 10 years. No budget reason, at least.

 

I mean do we really need to wait 10 years to get some connectivity in this city? Its hard enough to get around as it is, the streets and designs are so overbearing.

 

Punch- I hope you are right about the bicycle access being a requirement. Hopefully soon we will hear the details about that being changed in the "design"

 

 

I need to look the specific wording of that rule.  If ODOT rules it "unfeasible" it might just go away as a requirement

Just a thought, not sure if its been thrown out there.  As an alternative, would it be a feasible, or even a good idea, to spend the money on making a better (safer?) connection between Tremont and Ohio City rather than adding a ped lane to the bridge?  They are right next to each other, yet I know people in both neighborhoods who wouldn't dare walk between the two.  In addition to connecting the two neighborhoods, it would ideally facilitate the Tremont to Downtown connection. 

 

I haven't looked at any maps or dug up any hard facts on this, just throwing the idea out there.

^That was my thought as well.

 

I guess I am having a hard time picturing how this bike/ped lane would be on the bridge.  Are there other examples of such lanes on major interstates around the country?  In my wanderings, I can't recall any.... particularly on a span this long and this high up.  Also, how would it work with getting on/off from street level?  Where would be the two end points?  Were there ever any renderings of what the concept would be?

For $40 million, couldn't we get a dedicated ped/bike bridge over the valley?

... Or how about UNDER the bridge?... using the already planned steel structure for the needed support.

all these are the reasons why it's not so ridiculous that there isn't go to be a ped bridge... but that ODOT didn't even allow design firms to show how they would have done it or what it would cost.  They said no before even allowing someone to show them what they thought.

As somebody who lives in Tremont and works Downtown, a ped/bike route on the Innerbelt would create a significantly shorter commute. Presently, my choices are either to:

1. Zig-zag from W. 14th west across a narrow Abbey Ave. to an even narrower W. 20th then east across the Lorain Carnegie to Ontario (which is another awful road for cyclists).

2. Shoot down Literary Hill to W. 3rd, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the W. 3rd Bridge (which is being maintained presently anyway), then hump it up Commercial Hill (which will be eliminated by the new Innerbelt Bridge anyway).

3. Shoot down University to Scranton, take the bumpy and extremely dusty ride to Carter Road, possibly wait 15+ minutes for the Carter Road bridge, then go to Old River and hump it up St. Clair.

 

The argument has never been an either/or as ODOT wants us to believe, but one of basic fairness and connectivity. ODOT had a responsibility to make a reasonable analysis of bike and ped connections, which it didn't do until the last minute. And when they finally looked at it, they said it would cost $40 million to add the bike and ped connection. $40 million to a bridge that is estimated to cost less than $290 million.

 

Words fail me.

 

[EDIT: By the bye, as I ride over the Lorain Carnegie, although the speed limit is 35 mph, cars regularly drive 50+ mph, and there is no protection for cyclists whatsoever. A separated lane on the Innerbelt Bridge would have been much, much safer, even at highway speeds.]

Personally, I didn't see the need. I'll rarely if ever walk to Tremont from downtown, so seeing that there were options seemed good enough.

 

Then I walked it.

 

Scranton Rd doesn't even have sidewalks in places, and isn't a road I'd want to take by myself again (certainly not at night), then the hill up University wore me out so much I didn't really want to walk any further for a while. So I grabbed some food while seithing in jealosy at your dining options in Tremont, then took Abbey to 20th to Lorain-Carnegie. Abbey was rickety and just felt out of the way since I could see downtown off in the distance and see that I was walking the wrong way, then 20th just felt like I was taking a shortcut through someone's neighborhood. Then the sidewalk on the L-C bridge was narrow, slanted, had potholes, and a curb about 8 inches high that I kept being scared I'd fall off of and sprain my ankle.

 

I've never taken literary hill to W 3rd, but if it's as bad an option as the two I've taken I would support whole heartedly your efforts to get a safe, clean bike route on the bridge.

^That was my thought as well.

 

I guess I am having a hard time picturing how this bike/ped lane would be on the bridge. Are there other examples of such lanes on major interstates around the country? In my wanderings, I can't recall any.... particularly on a span this long and this high up. Also, how would it work with getting on/off from street level? Where would be the two end points? Were there ever any renderings of what the concept would be?

 

The one I think of is the Golden gate bridge. Take a look at this

 

http://goldengatebridge.org/photos/bridgewalk.php#

 

Nothing fancy

...A weather-protected, well-lit walk/bilkeway would do wonders for the marketability of the neighborhood to former suburbanites.

I had not thought of putting a roof on it.  That would be nice.

 

I just don't see how it would be significantly faster than using West 3rd from Tremont if that would be the reason.  The difference seems negligible to a point where I don't see those who haven't been using that route since Tremont's resurgence would suddenly start carrying their briefcase across I-90 bridge...

What if you live in a one car household?  What if you are a teenager or poor and the only job you can find is in food service?  You could find work when you otherwise could not.  I used to pedal 3 miles to the mall for a summer job when I was 19.  It was fun.

I ride my bike to work everyday.  Up hills, over bridges, and into downtown.  I think a PED lane on the new innerbelt bridge would be great.  But frankly, I'm not that upset it's not included.  It's an extra 1/2 mile to take LC compared to the innerbelt bridge.  I see that as negligible.  And it's not like - as others have mentioned - the existing roads (cough, Carnegie, Ontario cough) are biker's paradise now anyway so why don't we campaign to fix and re-pave existing roads complete with dedicated bike lanes before we get our panties in a bunch about the lack of a bike lane on the new bridge?

 

And more importantly, I wish more bikers would start to obey traffic and safety laws.  Maybe once we stop thumbing our nose at ODOT and their silly laws and regulations they'll stop thumbing their nose at us. 

^^Not sure what your point is.... but I still like the idea of a separate ped/bike bridge better (yes, I know it isn't even on the table).  How great would it be to a bridge shaped like a "Y" with one starting point around W14th in Tremont and another being at the point where the L-C bridge connect to O-C.  How far can $40 million take you on such a project?

 

The one I think of is the Golden gate bridge. Take a look at this

 

http://goldengatebridge.org/photos/bridgewalk.php#

 

Nothing fancy

 

I thought they might have one.  Those dang hippies in NoCal.  A point of note, however, is that the speed limit on the GG bridge is 45 mph, I believe.

^That was my thought as well.

 

I guess I am having a hard time picturing how this bike/ped lane would be on the bridge. Are there other examples of such lanes on major interstates around the country? In my wanderings, I can't recall any.... particularly on a span this long and this high up. Also, how would it work with getting on/off from street level? Where would be the two end points? Were there ever any renderings of what the concept would be?

 

The new Bay Bridge being built in San Francisco also has a dedicated pedestrian/bike way.

 

For that matter so do bridges built in the 19th century.  One from Brooklyn to Manhattan comes to mind...

There's no doubt plenty of bridges that have ped/bike lanes.  I use them in my travels.  I was talking about something of comparable size, distance, speed, height, etc. - highways.  For instance, does the Skyway in Chicago have any bike/ped lanes?  How about the Garden State Parkway?  Anywhere on I-95 near the major population centers?

^The Skyway has sidewalks  on the city streets below it. 

And if the we are comparing the Chicago Skyway to the Innerbelt Bridge then the Bay Bridge in Frisco must be a fair comparison also.

 

The point here is there is a need for it--a well lit, safe, covered or uncovered bike/pedestrian path connecting Tremont to Downtown makes sense. 

There's no doubt plenty of bridges that have ped/bike lanes.  I use them in my travels.  I was talking about something of comparable size, distance, speed, height, etc. - highways.  For instance, does the Skyway in Chicago have any bike/ped lanes?  How about the Garden State Parkway?  Anywhere on I-95 near the major population centers?

 

this is probably the most comprehensive list (and it hasn't been updated for a few years):

http://mobikefed.org/2006/05/bicycle-paths-on-interstate-freeway.php

 

the cuyahoga river is a designated federal shipping channel, so has minimum clearance requirements - something like 92 feet, iirc.  the point to note here is that the other pedestrian and bicycle crossings on lorain and detroit are at least this high as well.

There's no doubt plenty of bridges that have ped/bike lanes.  I use them in my travels.  I was talking about something of comparable size, distance, speed, height, etc. - highways.  For instance, does the Skyway in Chicago have any bike/ped lanes?  How about the Garden State Parkway?  Anywhere on I-95 near the major population centers?

 

The GW Bridge connecting NJ and Manhattan carries I-95 as well as ped/bike lanes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:George_Washington_Bridge_New_York_roadway_and_tower.jpg

Thanks Straphanger.  That is what I was looking for.... just to get the visual.

 

With the phased construction of the two bridges, perhaps this is still possible.  With the first bridge having to carry traffic both ways while the second bridge is under construction, I imagine they will need as much space for traffic as possible.  However, when the first bridge is dedicated both ways and retructuring has to occur anyway, maybe they can be added.

Wishful thinking department:  Maybe we can get a signature pedestrian bridge to go between the two highway bridges.

 

 

Maybe get the same guy who is doing the one on north coast harbor, and maybe more

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2010/09/bridge_architect_miguel_rosale.html

The Williamsburg Bridge connects the lower east side of Manhattan at Delancy St to Williamsburg Brooklyn and the BQE expressway (I278).  The bike/pedway is elevated above the train tracks and auto traffic in the center of the bridge.  I have been across it many times, and it is very pleasant despite the traffic at freeway speeds.  It also carries the J,M and Z trains

 

There was a "Real Housewives" episode where 2 of them were taped walking across it to visit a friend and got in a fight.  I saw it on "The Soup"....I swear I don't watch RH

 

http://citynoise.org/article/7309

 

http://www.transalt.org/files/resources/bridges/williamsburg.html

 

From Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williamsburg_Bridge

 

"Had the Lower Manhattan Expressway been built, the Williamsburg Bridge would have obtained the Interstate 78 designation."

 

Maybe get the same guy who is doing the one on north coast harbor, and maybe more

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2010/09/bridge_architect_miguel_rosale.html

 

Like what I see there!

The Williamsburg Bridge connects the lower east side of Manhattan at Delancy St to Williamsburg Brooklyn and the BQE expressway (I278).   The bike/pedway is elevated above the train tracks and auto traffic in the center of the bridge. I have been across it many times, and it is very pleasant despite the traffic at freeway speeds. It also carries the J,M and Z trains

 

There was a "Real Housewives" episode where 2 of them were taped walking across it to visit a friend and got in a fight. I saw it on "The Soup"....I swear I don't watch RH

 

http://citynoise.org/article/7309

 

http://www.transalt.org/files/resources/bridges/williamsburg.html

 

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williamsburg_Bridge

 

"Had the Lower Manhattan Expressway been built, the Williamsburg Bridge would have obtained the Interstate 78 designation."

 

The Brooklyn Bridge has an elevated walkay/bicycle path with unobstucted views of lower Manhattan and Brooklyn.  I frequently walk this path from my BK apt to NY.

Maybe get the same guy who is doing the one on north coast harbor, and maybe more

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2010/09/bridge_architect_miguel_rosale.html: An early concept for the bridge shows how an elevated walkway could be supported on pencil-thin masts with diagonal steel cables evoking the image of sailboats bobbing at anchor.

A nice tribute to Ed Hauser, a catamaran sailor

At the risk of getting suspended again, I will say that I think something fishy is going on at ODOT:

 

 

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Top engineers within the Ohio Department of Transportation debated whether a bid to build the Inner Belt Bridge met the state's design requirements, weeks before the multimillion-dollar contract was awarded.

 

 

Thomas Hyland, deputy construction project manager, and Timothy Keller, an administrator in ODOT's Office of Structural Engineering, were among those who questioned the bridge design by Walsh Construction of Chicago and HNTB of Ohio Inc., a Plain Dealer review of depositions filed recently in the Ohio Court of Claims in Columbus found.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/11/odot_engineers_questioned_winn.html

At the risk of getting suspended again, I will say that I think something fishy is going on at ODOT:

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Top engineers within the Ohio Department of Transportation debated whether a bid to build the Inner Belt Bridge met the state's design requirements, weeks before the multimillion-dollar contract was awarded.

 

 

Thomas Hyland, deputy construction project manager, and Timothy Keller, an administrator in ODOT's Office of Structural Engineering, were among those who questioned the bridge design by Walsh Construction of Chicago and HNTB of Ohio Inc., a Plain Dealer review of depositions filed recently in the Ohio Court of Claims in Columbus found.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/11/odot_engineers_questioned_winn.html

 

 

The article is written to make it sound fishy, but reading the whole article I get the impression that there were lots of specifications.  Presumably each design was rated based on how well it met each of the specs.  If neither design met 100% (likely) then at some point ODOT had to make a judgment on which design they like best.  Just because there was internal debate about whether this one spec was met or not does not mean that the whole process was crooked. 

 

Time will tell, but I doubt that this lawsuit goes anywhere, particularly since the judge refused to stay the design-build process.  So while the lawsuit continues, the winning bridge will get built. 

 

The losers are fighting because ODOT guaranteed $1M to the losing team(s) and they spent $1.6M?  And now they have attorneys' fees on top of that -- that just doesn't seem like a smart bet.  Makes me wonder whether the attorneys took this case on a contingency fee basis (in which case the attorneys only get paid if they win). 

Discussion about Wendy Park was moved to that thread at:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,24886.0.html

Seriously!  They have a public input page.  I told them to delete the accent lighting because electricity uses resources that should be saved for future generations.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/Pages/default.aspx

^But it's so pretty...

A Final Chance To Influence Bridge Designers

 

The three-year, $287 million project is Ohio’s largest transportation project, and is nearing the end of the planning phase.

Builder Walsh Construction and designer HNTB Ohio are still soliciting design ideas, through the ODOT web site, from bridge users and nearby residents.

 

At tonight’s meeting at the Pilgrim Church Fellowship Hall in Tremont, they’ll offer comparative views of the neighborhood, allowing visitors to see for themselves how the bridge proposal fits its surrounding.

 

http://www.wcpn.org/WCPN/news/37389

Seems like a great opportunity for those of you objecting to the lack of bike lanes to voice your opinions.  Give 'em hell!

I am happy to see the level of detail that will take place at ground level, from the renderings I like what is being considered. Also wasn't the Broadway Mills building scheduled for demo or will that be in the way of the second bridge?

The link at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2438.msg530209.html#msg530209 shows that they will recycle parts of the Broadway Mills Building for the new bridge.

Could you check that link? It brings me back to this page.

Seriously! They have a public input page. I told them to delete the accent lighting because electricity uses resources that should be saved for future generations.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/Pages/default.aspx

hmm..It looks like they have taken the survey down, can't access it from the ODOT page. But as far as the BroadwayMills building it was hard to tell from the renderings just what the plans were long term. I had thought at one point it was scheduled for demo along with the Cold Storage building. 

Nothing personal against Voinovich, but I'm not a big fan of naming major pieces of infrastructure after living politicians. 

 

New Inner Belt bridge to be named for Voinovich, Kasich says

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/12/new_innerbelt_bridge_to_be_nam.html

 

"George Voinovich State Prison"

"George Voinovich Strip Mine"

New Inner Belt Bridge will light up the night

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The underside of the new Inner Belt Bridge will be a canvas of changing colors as it spans the Cuyahoga River valley.

 

That's the most dramatic flourish among final artistic and aesthetic details approved Friday by the Cleveland City Planning Commission.

 

The approval clears the way for the $287.4 million project to break ground, with some buildings southwest of the Gateway sports complex scheduled to come down as soon as next month.

 

.........................................

 

Curving girders that support the bridge deck will be lit with light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, that are capable of changing color.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/01/post_414.html

 

pdf linked within the article - http://media.cleveland.com/metro/other/DesignCommitteeAndPlan%20Commission.pdf

 

How many LEDs would it have cost to add a bike/ped lane?  LEDs are expensive, and they had to add multiple sets for their dreamy color sequence.

How many LEDs would it have cost to add a bike/ped lane? LEDs are expensive, and they had to add multiple sets for their dreamy color sequence.

 

I'm all for both.  In the bigger picture the cost of the bike lane on a bridge which will hopefully stand for the next 100 years is well worth it.

 

The LED's will add a nice visual dynamic to the valley.  They installed those on the Peace Bridge between Ft Erie and Buffalo a couple years back--makes for a very nice view at night.

i am still disgusted at how the design turned out. honestly, I would call it nothing short of putrid for what they wanted to accomplish. Its a cheap engineering solution that will be lit up at night big deal. I didnt pay enough attention to this project to get my voice heard.. wish I could have attended the meetings. ODOT is a joke.

 

Just saying.. with all the other construction going on this could be a great testament to our city. I would ask why this specific bridge belongs in our city, would it be any different if it were placed anywhere else? NO. its just so.. blah.

 

/end pessimism

 

its kind of nice lit up at night? :/

Should it have looked like a Hullet unloader?  Progressive Field?  A sailboat?

^yes

^

 

 

exactly.

 

/hangs head and hopes for the best.

I am as disapointed as most (most particuarly in the process), but in all fairness, there was absolutely no reason to build a cable stay bridge here.  It would have essentially been an unbelievably outrageously overpriced piece of public art.