I would hope that the state already intended on doing this...

The chances of getting more than a token amount of money from the TIGER program is slim and none. In the last round, more than $14 billion worth of requests were made to this $500 million pot of money. This time, up to $100 million may be awarded to passenger rail projects and $120 million must be set aside for rural projects. The rail project funding is a goal and therefore not required. But the rural project funding allocation is a hard number. So unless ODOT plans on moving the Inner Belt bridge to Geauga County and adding a rail deck to it, I don't see it getting more than something in the tens of millions, like $20 million or so (which I think is about the average TIGER award anyway). Not sure what good that will do, so it may end up getting nothing.

ODOT will apply for $120 million to help pay for second Inner Belt Bridge

Published: Friday, February 24, 2012, 5:45 AM

Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio --

 

The state will seek a $120 million federal grant to hasten construction of a second Inner Belt Bridge.

 

As expected, the Ohio Department of Transportation will apply for a big chunk of the $500 million that the U.S. Department of Transportation is dangling for new roads and bridges nationwide.

 

The competitive grant program is among a number of sources that state officials and local Congressional leaders hope to tap in paying for the $350 million bridge project.

 

ODOT stunned local officials last month with a draft funding plan that delayed money for the new, Interstate 90 span until 2023.

 

Plans had called for the new bridge to open by 2016. It would replace the existing Inner Belt span and pair with the new bridge already under construction in the Cuyahoga River Valley.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2012/02/odot_applies_for_120_million_t.html#incart_hbx

Good luck. This is like leading a camel dying of thirst to a drying oasis already populated by hundreds of other camels dying of thirst.

 

The way I see it, there's only two choices: try to save the oasis by thinning the herd, or live off camel meat and blood while you search for another oasis. Either way, there's going to be fewer camels for a while.

 

(hint: big, new capacity highway projects are the camels, the gas tax is the oasis, and the shepherds are state and local transportation departments).

Cleveland councilman talks to President Obama about funding for the Innerbelt Bridge Project

 

 

Posted: 1:14 PM

Last Updated: 1 hour and 29 minutes ago

By: Paul Kiska, newsnet5.com

By: Tara Sutton, newsnet5.com

 

CLEVELAND - The fight for funding to get the new Innerbelt Bridge completed long before 2023 may get some big name backing.

 

Councilman Matt Zone met with President Barack Obama during his recent trip to Washington D.C. and talked about the Innerbelt Bridge Project, which Zone thinks is one of the most pressing issues for Cleveland’s economy.

 

The bridge for traffic going westbound is set to open next year. Eastbound traffic was supposed to be done in 2016, but a funding issue led to a revised plan that would delay it until 2023.

 

ODOT now needs $350 million to complete the project sooner.

 

ODOT just applied for $125 million in federal grants and is also looking into privatizing rest stops on non-toll interstates in Ohio to bring in additional money. Meanwhile, Congress debates a transportation bill that may provide more funding.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/cleveland-councilman-talks-to-president-obama-about-funding-for-the-innerbelt-bridge-project#ixzz1phPmKQLG

I got a few pics of the Inner Belt bridge progress as I was driving thru the area over the weekend.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks!

 

In about 15 years, as highway funding continues to erode, as the old Inner Belt bridge also continues to erode and is declared as unsafe, and the new eastbound bridge is still not funded, I wonder if we'll see three eastbound and three westbound lanes "temporarily" routed over the new bridge?

That would make it our brand new "functionally obsolete" bridge right?

Eastbound traffic would have been routed over the westbound span while the old bridge was being torn down.  They will just leave it at that.

Or they could make I-490 eastbound and I-90 westbound....

Maybe the Eastbound side could be left up for a few more years to allow pedistrian and bicycle traffic to get from Tremont to downtown.  :roll:

Good points, Trav and Foraker. 

ODOT put moving letter signs up on I-90 westbound in Willoughby.  They could post advice to drivers: "take I-271 to I-480 if you are just passing through the area". 

^271 and 480 gets enough traffic as it is. They'd be better off routing people down to 490.

^271 and 480 gets enough traffic as it is. They'd be better off routing people down to 490.

 

Or via Canada!

 

Some idea of what Ontario and Carnegie might look like.

^The shorter crosswalks will be a nice change.

Last night I got on 90 West at Carnegie and followed it past the I-71 split.  The path of the new bridge is getting more clear by the day.  The earthwork in addition to the driven piles...  I expect this summer to bring a significant amount of change to the landscape of the area.  I hope it all gets documented.

Thanks!

 

In about 15 years, as highway funding continues to erode, as the old Inner Belt bridge also continues to erode and is declared as unsafe, and the new eastbound bridge is still not funded, I wonder if we'll see three eastbound and three westbound lanes "temporarily" routed over the new bridge?

 

the plan is to tear down the eastbound bridge shortly after the west bound bridge opens, at least a few years.

then according to ODOT the westbound bridge will have 4 lanes west bound and 2 lanes east bound.

 

keep in mind most east bound exits will be in accessible for the most part especially Ontario and East 9th.

 

this is expected to go on until the new eastbound bridge is completed.

Maybe the Eastbound side could be left up for a few more years to allow pedistrian and bicycle traffic to get from Tremont to downtown.  :roll:

 

"ba-doomp-tish!!!"

the plan is to tear down the eastbound bridge shortly after the west bound bridge opens, at least a few years.

then according to ODOT the westbound bridge will have 4 lanes west bound and 2 lanes east bound.

 

keep in mind most east bound exits will be in accessible for the most part especially Ontario and East 9th.

 

this is expected to go on until the new eastbound bridge is completed.

 

You sure?

We have steel...

According to their facebook page this steel will be assembled first around piers 13/14(near the Fire museum). Beginning in May and after you will see steel arrive for the larger stretch over the valley. We are going to see a lot of steel going up over the next year. Should be fun to watch.

awesome.  I love seeing massive structural steel pieces like that.  It's like a massive tetris piece

Check out the webcam. The first girder is going up right now at what will be the future on-ramp by Ontario and Carnegie.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/Innerbelt/InnerbeltBridge/NewsInformation/Pages/WebCamsPhotos.aspx

the plan is to tear down the eastbound bridge shortly after the west bound bridge opens, at least a few years.

then according to ODOT the westbound bridge will have 4 lanes west bound and 2 lanes east bound.

 

keep in mind most east bound exits will be in accessible for the most part especially Ontario and East 9th.

 

this is expected to go on until the new eastbound bridge is completed.

 

 

 

You sure?

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20DRAFT%20Preliminary%20Major%20New%20Program%20List.pdf

 

the bridge is going down in 2014, rebuilt in 2023

 

The info was from the head of ODOT district 12

 

What are ODOT's revenue assumptions for the next 10 years? If I remember correctly, they are assuming a small growth in revenues. I don't see it. I think revenues are going to fall and construction costs (mainly from the costs of materials) are going to remain high. There are so many wildcard issues out there too, ranging from Congress' inability to renew the federal transportation program, Congress' inability to identify the best ways to generate revenue from alternative fuels, the application of natural gas in passenger and construction vehicles (cars using natgas could cost ODOT big bucks/construction vehicles using nat gas could save ODOT big bucks), how many Baby Boomers keep driving after retirement, if young people keep staying away from cars, and much much more.

 

If ODOT expects use bond-issue proceeds to pay for large, major/new capacity projects like the second Inner Belt bridge, I don't see where the revenues are going to come from. I hope they're saving up money for this project. If not, get used to squeezing five lanes total over the new bridge. They could physically fit six (three lanes in each direction), but that means having an FHWA-noncompliant roadway. FHWA requires breakdown lanes on both sides of newly built or widened roadways. Maybe FHWA could issue a waiver for the bridge only?

From Prog Field.

I believe these bridges count as being in the Flats...

 

ODOT looking at a private sector deal to build the second Inner Belt Bridge on time

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- ODOT is exploring ways to attract private interests to the second Inner Belt Bridge and other big-ticket projects statewide.

 

The idea is to raise money faster and get projects built more quickly, rather than face years of delay.One option for the second bridge could be to seek bids from a team of designers and builders, which would pay for all or part of the $317 million project up front. The state would pay them back over time, Faulkner said.

 

ODOT could also opt to use the existing span longer. But the corroding bridge, similar in design to one that collapsed in Minneapolis in 2007, is already beyond its designed life span. It would cost $89 million to repair it for use a decade beyond 2013.

 

To avoid those scenarios, city, state and federal officials have been pushing for new sources of money to keep the second bridge project on track.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/05/post_22.html

Updated TRAC schedule shows EB existing I-90 bridge getting demo'd next year in 2013 after the new bridge opens.  Looks like new EB bridge to begin in 2014 and finish in 2016.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/TRAC%20List/2013-2016%20Major%20New%20Construction%20Program.pdf

I don't know what the ODOT "phase" "Time Saved Since  the DRAFT List" means. 

 

TV news reported a completion of the EB bridge in ~2019:

 

http://fox8.com/2012/06/06/innerbelt-bridge-project-moved-up-to-2016/

According to the latest plan, construction on the second Innerbelt Bridge will begin in 2016 and will take about three years to complete.

The orange "time saved" shows the difference in the timing of funding availability from the draft list that was released in January.  So, for the Innerbelt EB Bridge, the $302.0 is now in the 2016 column (when construction will begin) which is moved up from what the draft list had as 2023 (which is what the orange shading shows).

Am I reading that correctly in that the Innerbelt curve smoothing is removed completely from the list?

Part of the innerbelt will be done in 2030. How do they know it will still cost only 160 million in 2030?

^Only the bridges (presumably). According to the aforementioned spreadsheet, the only other portion of the Innerbelt to have any work funded is the portion of the trench at East 22nd - and that doesn't even START until 2030. There is no mention (that I recall) of any other portion being funded

^Only the bridges (presumably). According to the aforementioned spreadsheet, the only other portion of the Innerbelt to have any work funded is the portion of the trench at East 22nd - and that doesn't even START until 2030. There is no mention (that I recall) of any other portion being funded

 

At this rate we won't even need the bridge.

 

Because of Hover cars.

I havent really been paying attention to this, but why do we need two bridges in the first place?

I havent really been paying attention to this, but why do we need two bridges in the first place?

So that there's room for a shoulder.

Saw these pics of the E.9th Street girder installation on the Inner Belt Bridge Facebook page from June 4th.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.facebook.com/Innerbelt

So that there's room for a shoulder.

 

So that there's room for a shoulder (aka breakdown lanes) on BOTH sides of each direction of the highway, as per the FHWA design manual. Any time federal funds are used to reconstruct (not resurface) and/or add a lane to a highway, the roadway has to meet updated FHWA design standards (including two breakdown lanes on both sides, sound walls unless the affected community opts out, reflectors, signage, etc).

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/06/second_inner_belt_bridge_will.html

 

Second Inner Belt Bridge will not get federal grant, disappointing ODOT and Congressional leaders

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Federal money that might have allowed construction of Cleveland's second Inner Belt Bridge to begin earlier than 2016 has been denied.

 

Congressional offices confirmed Tuesday that a Columbus-area project would be the only one in Ohio receiving a highly competitive grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation.

 

ODOT, working with Cleveland, had applied for $125 million to keep the second Inner Belt Bridge on schedule. The bridge was to have been started in 2013 and completed three years later.........

.

 

Drove past Progressive field yesterday.  The area in front at the intersection of Carnegie & Ontario is totally getting reconfigured.  By the looks of it, there will be a new parcel of land available once the lanes are reduced.  Should be interesting to see if anything gets built there.

Drove past Progressive field yesterday.  The area in front at the intersection of Carnegie & Ontario is totally getting reconfigured.  By the looks of it, there will be a new parcel of land available once the lanes are reduced.  Should be interesting to see if anything gets built there.

 

I've been watching that too -- during the rare instances that I'm driving downtown. ;) But it looks like the lanes that are left over from the pre-1950s Pittsburg Avenue are being removed rather than replaced. Then my dream of putting a  building or two there with a rapid station in the basement can be realized. ;) x2

Saw this photo of the LC bridge being readied for the bike lane enhancement as part of the inner belt project. I know the work includes lighting for the guardians of transportation. I hope it involves cleaning them too. (Photo from jmd41280 on flicker)

^ Thats a cool shot. Perfect angle, and you see the West Side Market in the back.

Awesome photo

Drove past Progressive field yesterday.  The area in front at the intersection of Carnegie & Ontario is totally getting reconfigured.  By the looks of it, there will be a new parcel of land available once the lanes are reduced.  Should be interesting to see if anything gets built there.

 

That new available area will partially be taken up by a new biking/walking promenade which will be an extension of the Carnegie bridge bikeway/walkway.

Drove past Progressive field yesterday.  The area in front at the intersection of Carnegie & Ontario is totally getting reconfigured.  By the looks of it, there will be a new parcel of land available once the lanes are reduced.  Should be interesting to see if anything gets built there.

 

I've been watching that too -- during the rare instances that I'm driving downtown. ;) But it looks like the lanes that are left over from the pre-1950s Pittsburg Avenue are being removed rather than replaced. Then my dream of putting a  building or two there with a rapid station in the basement can be realized. ;) x2

 

Are you guys referring the area in the NW quadrant of the intersection?  If so, I believe that's part of the L-C bike enhancements: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D12/PlanningEngineering/Documents/051911%20Hope%20Memorial%20Bridge%20East%20End.pdf

 

EDIT: tradition7 beat me to it.  But I provided a link :)

Thanks for the link. I want bike paths, but the location of that path on the NW corner of the intersection could block development of that site. Who would be the owner of that land and would they be willing to make it available for development?

Unless the city is vacating the ROW, it would retain ownership.  I guess I see your point, but you could take a glass half full view and imagine that the city would be more likely to vacate the old ROW some day in the distant future now that it's been removed from the road network.  And you could also imagine the multipurpose train being integrated into any mega development there.

Oh I definitely take a glass half-full view of this, as long as that glass isn't sealed shut by the trail! ;)

New pics up on flickr showing the progress as of June 19, 2012.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/innerbelt/7443319900/#in/set-72157626983604860

 

Really like this one: