It would be nice to see KJP's version, but his stuff allways seem to fall on deaf ears :(.  At least they are aiming to shrink that interchange

Good news.  Looks like we'll have FOUR iconic bridges NOT just one - and an additional new downtown neighborhood!  :clap:

What is the fate of the Greek Orthodox Cathedral, (or is it just a church?)

I think that was the only real local concern about the bridge.  If they figured out a way to not destroy it, I think it would sail through city hall

amazing!  will the endorsement of the mayor and city council come after the election, or should we start "pounding" the steps of city hall now??? 

 

Yes! Do so before and after Paul Alsenas makes his superb pitch to them. I don't know if he'll do that before or after the election (something tells me it should be done after).

 

It would be nice to see KJP's version, but his stuff allways seem to fall on deaf ears :(.  At least they are aiming to shrink that interchange

 

Alsenas' version is close enough to mine that I would be more than happy if his came to be. In fact, I was thinking of redrawing my concept map to reflect what he is proposing.

 

Good news.  Looks like we'll have FOUR iconic bridges NOT just one - and an additional new downtown neighborhood!   :clap:

 

No celebrating yet. Remember, Frank Jackson wants to see the Corridor of Opportunity built before the Inner Belt or the Lakefront Boulevard get any money. He is concerned that there won't be enough $$ left for the COO. I hope Alsenas shows Jackson that, by putting the Inner Belt in a trench through the south side of downtown, it will create less of a physical barrier between the Central neighborhood and downtown. That may, in fact, have been the intention 50 years ago, if you know what I mean.

 

What is the fate of the Greek Orthodox Cathedral, (or is it just a church?)

I think that was the only real local concern about the bridge.  If they figured out a way to not destroy it, I think it would sail through city hall 

 

Unknown as to the fate. It wasn't addressed at the meeting. My hope is to disassemble the church and reassemble it in the new neighborhood just south of Jacobs Field. That way, it could again be a neighborhood centerpiece, rather than be intruded upon by a noisy highway in its front yard. But I have no idea how much that would cost. If it's less than $10 million, I think it would be worth it. I would also relocate Sobolewski's University Inn to the new neighborhood, or wherever they want to go. I would hope the Inn and the church could be kept together.

 

One thing I was surprised that Alsenas didn't mention is that ODOT could receive a nice chunk of money by selling land on which the Central Interchange sets. Alsenas says it represents 120 acres. Figure half of it would stay in the public domain (as city-owned streets and ODOT's Innerbelt). The land could be sold at any price below market rate, and ODOT will come out ahead. The county values the parking lots which Zaremba bought for The Avenue development on Superior at East 12th at between $20 and $25 per square foot. Based on that, ODOT could receive anywhere from $50 million to $65 million by selling 60 acres of the Central Interchange land to private developers.

 

Alsenas also didn't mention the potential for expanding the taxbase (unless I missed it). Think of the property tax revenues that could be generated for the school district (and possibly a TIF to build the street infrastructure, and possibly put a light-rail line through the neighborhood). There are so many opportunities that can be generated from this project, it's remarkable. But ODOT's approach shows what happens when civil engineers are involved at the onset of a project, rather than at the end, after community planners have set the vision and asked the civil engineers how to make the vision work. Now, community planners like Alsenas have to play catch up.

 

KJP

KJP, I really like that last paragraph.  That sums up nicely what I think was wrong with the process thus far.

 

I think it also needs to be mentioned that Alsenas himself said that a critical piece of making this happen is that the community itself needs to get behind this concept and demand a world class design.  The other players at the state and county seem to be willing to listen, and the City will too, I would think, if they know that the voters and taxpayers care.  The planning process thus far has only encouraged participation of the "I want my offramp saved" variety.  The community needs to speak up and say that it wants a real comprehensive vision.  It isn't enough at a planning meeting to have one person state a good idea and think it will sway the room with the power of its logic.  The power comes in numbers!  People need to turn out!

I was looking at what http://www.innerbelt.org/June9Advcommtg.ppt  slide 14, says its removed from further consideration. Looks like the southren allignment wont be happening, unless we get more powers than odot?

ODOT will do what the city asks them to do, which goes back to the community planning aspect. So far, the city hasn't asked them, so ODOT hasn't bothered to do anything different than pursue it from a civil engineering perspective. Having the Cuyahoga County Mayors & Managers Association, the Cuyahoga County Commissioners, and Senator George Voinovich push for the southern alignment is helpful, but if the city doesn't dictate to ODOT its land use preference, then all bets are off. Yet, who will benefit from the southern alignment? The city, of course.

 

KJP

It is sad that the City isn't taking the lead on this, but isn't the belief at City Hall still that the Opportunity Corridor will not happen if the resources go to the bridge?  It sounded today like the County doesn't think that's so.  If so, that should remove the barrier that was holding back the support of City Hall. 

 

At any rate, I don't like the idea of cutting out an opportunity that must be pursued now in favor of an opportunity that could be pursued later.  In other words, the bridge has to happen, by definition, when the Innerbelt is reconstructed.  The Opportunity Corridor could wait and be done later with a different set of resources.

That's true, and the opportunity corridor could be done without delay, if Voinovich's $$ contribution has made the difference. Perhaps that's why Alsenas is going on the warpath now.

 

By the way, after looking at some satellite images, I seriously question whether the Greek Orthodox Church has to be touched. Church officials should be given the option of moving it, however.

 

Below is a satellite image worth considering. The top of the image is north. The white shape at the bottom is the outline of the church's parking lot, which is just north of the church itself. However, the University Inn would likely be a casualty. The gray line shows the easternmost edge of the Innerbelt's lanes and ramps could take to avoid using any of the church's property. In reality, it may not even need to go that far east to build the bridge without disrupting traffic.

 

So, the church will stay.  Looks like everyone will be on board!

 

Good news

OK, I'm making a list of representatives to write...

 

So far, I've got Joe Cimperman, Frank Jackson and Jane Campbell...who else???

That should cover it. If you want to talk to Frank Jackson directly, go to the grand opening of St. John's Village West at East 38th and Central Avenue, at 11:30 a.m. tomorrow (Oct. 29). I hadn't heard of this project either -- St. John's Village West is part of the Village of Central, a $100 million housing development consisting of 465 new homes. St. John's alone consists of 75 townhomes and 75 single-family homes.

 

Anyway, back to our regularly schedule program...the Inner Belt!

OK, I'm making a list of representatives to write...

 

So far, I've got Joe Cimperman, Frank Jackson and Jane Campbell...who else???

 

Cuyahoga county commissoners, US congress/Senators, State congress/senators, BID/CDC's (tremont, ohio city, Downtown cleveland partnership, gateway), cleveland city council's transportation committee (http://www.clevelandcitycouncil.org/committees.asp?CommitteeID={EA5951A6-C326-4ECA-B8AE-2408230E81E1}), ODOT folks

 

Anyone else???

I'm told that Nov. 17 will be the drop-dead date for ODOT to seek input on whether the signature bridge, on the southern alignment, should be included in the Inner Belt plan. Nov. 17 also is going to be a busy day. Here is what's on tap:

 

> ODOT Innerbelt scoping committee meeting 9 a.m. Nov. 17, NOACA offices at Superior and East13th;

 

> ODOT Innerbelt public forum 4:30 p.m. Nov. 17, Wolstein Center (CSU Convocation Center, East 22nd between Prospect and Carnegie).

 

NEXT DAY (Nov. 18)

 

> Cleveland City Planning Commission meeting 9 a.m., City Hall, to discuss Innerbelt with ODOT staff (might also do it at their meeting previous to this one, on Nov. 4) -- suggestion: ATTEND AND SPEAK AT BOTH;

 

 

 

Please contact your friends, family and associates, and show them some of the bridge pictures on this string, as well as the image below (download a higher-resolution, 1MB version at http://members.cox.net/corridorscampaign/innerbelthood.jpg ) of what the southern alignment of the Inner Belt could produce for the city -- a wonderful new neighborhood built on ODOT land, that could generate an incredible amount of income and property taxes for schools, for the Lakefront Boulevard and Corridor of Opportunity to University Circle, and of course, provide a magnificent, exciting new Innerbelt bridge that will tell all those who traverse it that Cleveland's future is just as magnificent and exciting:

 

 

Now is the time for all good citizens to speak up for restoring magificence and excitement to our city!

Isn't November 17th also the day that they'll be discussing the Opportunity Corridor?  If so, I worry that this will get a bum deal... Unless we show up, en masse, to demand that this be recognized!

There is every reason for the city to have both. Funding is not the issue. Having the will to demand more from ODOT and from our city is the issue. Great cities expect nothing less.

Why rush across bridge to Cleveland's future?

Monday, October 31, 2005

It's always smart to get a second opinion before undergoing a difficult and expensive surgical operation.

 

The same holds true for Cleveland, where the Ohio Department of Transportation is planning a $700 million makeover of the Inner Belt, the network of vital traffic arteries and bridges that connects three interstates on the south and east sides of downtown...

 

Litt is architecture critic of The Plain Dealer.

 

 

Isn't November 17th also the day that they'll be discussing the Opportunity Corridor?  If so, I worry that this will get a bum deal... Unless we show up, en masse, to demand that this be recognized!

 

Its the day that stuff will be shown to the public.  Everything that is being discussed and that will be shown to the public is already on innerbelt.org.  Just look at the Ppts. Nothing new should happen on 11/17.  OC is much farther behind the Bridge.  A bridge will get built, however, the OC is an idea that is far from refinement.

Great article today.  I'm glad to see that Litt's been on this for months. 

 

I sent four letters last night (via email and post) and my final point in each was that "The Innerbelt project could set a precedent for the type of progressive, innovative decision-making that we in Cleveland need to advance in order to push the considerable momentum we have already built to a monumental scale."

 

Litt expounded on this point in his article and I only hope that the powers-that-be are listening!

 

 

In regards to the excellent article by Mr. Litt, he is urging all respondents to his article to contact their local representative and write a letter to the PD's forum section.  THIS PROJECT IS CRITICAL AND WE MUST TAKE A STAND. KJP is right in saying that it is up to the city to demand better, not ODOT.  Great cities do demand better!

 

PLEASE do write a LETTER, which has oh so much more impact than an email.

 

 

I wonder about that...which are they more likely to open?  An email with an attachment or a letter that arrives at their office in an envelope?  Mayor Campbell's First Assistant already replied to me via email to say that she had printed out my attachment and would share it with the Mayor.  I'll bet it differs from person to person.

Here's a troublesome story, and part of the reason why the signature bridge for the Innerbelt has had problems gaining favor with city officials. I encourage you all to read it, and share it with others. I will write about it next week....

 

First, some background... ODOT and the city reached a memorandum of understanding about the Innerbelt project early on. In a nutshell, the memo said the city didn't want existing neighborhoods harmed by the project.

 

Two years ago, Cuyahoga County Planning Director Paul Alsenas gets a brilliant idea for a new "signature bridge" over the Cuyahoga Valley. Proposed is a curving, cable-stayed bridge, and a southern alignment through the Central Interchange area, allowing for a huge development downtown, and in the Cuyahoga Valley off West Third.

 

ODOT looks into the idea, but doesn't want the Innerbelt routed as far south through the Central Interchange area as Alsenas' proposal. The reason is that ODOT's civil engineers fervently hold on to the notion of keeping looping ramps onto Ontario and East 9th Street. They also would put the Innerbelt over those streets, rather than under them. That's an important point, because a lower highway would allow ODOT to build a signature bridge that's 25 feet lower and 1,000 feet shorter -- dramatically reducing construction and maintenance costs.

 

Now here comes the really troublesome part, and why Alsenas and others want a "second opinion" from another engineering firm. When ODOT asked their engineering consultant, Burges & Niple, about a cable-stay bridge, B&N said Alsenas' proposal for a curving, cable-stay bridge couldn't be built. Instead, B&N said, the Innerbelt's Cuyahoga Valley approach would have to start curving farther south in Tremont so a cable-stay bridge over the Cuyahoga Valley bridge could be straight. That realignment would require the Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation in Tremont to be demolished.

 

Problem is, curved bridges can be cable-stayed, and one very similar to what the Innerbelt bridge could look like has already been built. An example is the 4,260-foot Clark Bridge over the Mississippi River at Alton, Illinois (see pictures below). That bridge is slightly longer than what the Innerbelt bridge would need to be, and has four vehicular lanes with two bicycle lanes (the Innerbelt would have 10 vehicular lanes and possibly one bicycle lane).

 

So now, ODOT takes B&N engineers at their word, and tells Cleveland city officials that Alsenas' signature bridge idea would result in the demolition of the Greek Orthodox Church of the Annunciation. If true, that would have violated the memorandum of understanding between the city and ODOT, to ensure the Innerbelt project doesn't harm the city.

 

Problem is, it's not true. This is why a second opinion from another engineering firm is needed, before ODOT starts hiring firms to lay out the final design for the Innerbelt before a consensus has been reached -- or the truth has been told.

 

Here is the photographic truth: a curving, cable-stay bridge can be built....

 

 

Even if it would take the Greek Orthodox church, I would think that some perspective is in order- taking one church, even an ok (frankly, not spectacular) church, should not be a deal breaker on something that could have this much of a positive impact on the whole city and create a new downtown neighborhood. 

 

Now, if it was St. Theodosius, I might have problems!

ODOT delays I-90 meeting

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation has postponed for three weeks the selection of a design team for a new Interstate 90 westbound bridge over the Cuyahoga River. The agency had planned to start the selection process Monday. But late Friday, in response to questions raised by the city of Cleveland, ODOT delayed the initial meeting on the selection process until Nov. 21. ODOT now plans to pick a designer on Dec. 12.

 

Nov 1, Plain Dealer

 

Yep, but it wasn't because of the bridge issue. It was because of the conflict of interest issues raised by Steven Litt in his column. But I'll take a delay anyway I can get it!

Hi, guys. We're working on getting some material about the bridge concept up on the web, and anything you could contribute would be appreciated. If you wouldn't mind quotes appearing on our site, it would be great if you could send us copies of the letters you sent to Washington and Columbus. Please send your materials to [email protected] . I'll be sure to keep you updated on our progress. Thanks!

Kevin,

 

Feel free to use any and all graphics I've posted here in this string. Also, check out the West Side Sun News on Thursday. I think all of the graphics will be able to make it into the paper, and my article and opinion column will likely appear in their entirety.

By the way, the Cuyahoga County Commissioners have posted on their web page a link to Paul Alsenas' PowerPoint presentation on the iconic Innerbelt bridge. I'll post the link here for convenience:

 

http://www.cuyahogacounty.us/bocc/bridge_presentation.ppt

 

They also have a press release worth reading, available at:

 

http://www.cuyahogacounty.us/bocc/mediaadvisory/2005/10272005.htm

 

 

Is increased cost of an iconic bridge an issue?  if so, why not consider using the future taxes on property created by the bridge re-alignment as extra money to make the project happen?

^This seems to be one of the strategies that Alsenas has mentioned...that the sale of property by ODOT will help offset the costs of a more expensive (but far more appropriate!) bridge...

I wrote an email to ODOT the other day supporting Litt's PD editorial the other day ... here is the response they forwarded to me today ...

 

*****************

 

Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your comments and concerns.

 

The City of Cleveland is the Ohio Department of Transportation's decision-making partner regarding the reconstruction of the Cleveland Innerbelt which includes I-90 from the Innerbelt Curve south to the I-90/I-71 split. ODOT considers Cleveland to be its partner in this endeavor and has no intentions of making decisions without their input and consensus, as well as the input and support of the Greater Cleveland community at large.

 

A broad-based advisory committee is currently overseeing the development of the overall Innerbelt reconstruction plan.  The Cleveland Urban Core Projects Advisory Committee, co-chaired by Craig Hebebrand, ODOT Project Manager and Mark Ricchiuto, City of Cleveland Public Service Director, is comprised of community and city leaders and serves as an advisory body to ODOT.  The Committee is guiding ODOT and the City through the next four steps of the ODOT Project Development Process (PDP), just as the original Innerbelt Scoping Committee served as the guiding authority during the first four steps of the process, starting in 1999.  The PDP is a 14-step process which will culminate with construction.

 

In regard to the Innerbelt Bridge, The Ohio Department of Transportation shares your belief that Cleveland deserves a bridge worthy of its rich history and befitting its skyline.

Please be advised that the selection of a team to conduct a structure type study for the new bridge carrying I-90 over the Cuyahoga River Valley near downtown Cleveland is scheduled to begin on November 21, 2005 and is scheduled to conclude on December 12, 2005.  

 

The selection committee will include representatives from the City of Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Federal Highway Administration and the Ohio Department of Transportation.  The selection process is based on qualifications.  Once selected, the successful team will develop for further consideration, a minimum of four structure types: Truss, box girder, extradosed and cable-stayed.  The Ohio Department of Transportation with its partner, the City of Cleveland, will then conduct a series of public meetings over the next year (2006) to gather public input on the various structure types being considered.

 

With respect to alternative alignments for the new bridge, ODOT has previously considered alignments both upstream and downstream of the existing structure.  The upstream (a.k.a. southern) alignment was fully considered prior to being removed from further consideration in June of 2005. Please note that the downstream (a.k.a. northern) alignment provides every opportunity to consider a full range of structure types for the new river crossing.

 

It is important to note that throughout the Project Development Process, ODOT has hosted many large public meetings as well as hundreds of briefings to community and business groups.  As the process continues, ODOT will continue to gather and weigh public opinion.  The public may make comments via the project website (www.innerbelt.org), via ODOT‚Äôs web site (www.dot.state.oh.us), through the U.S. Mail (Innerbelt Project Manager, 5500 Transportation Blvd., Garfield Hts., OH 44125) and in person at any ODOT-hosted public meeting.

 

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts and concerns.  Please be advised that next Public Meeting will be held from 4:30 PM to 8:30 PM on Thursday, November 17, 2005 at the Wolstein Center (formerly the Cleveland State University Convocation Center).  Additional information will be available via the Innerbelt web site at www.innerbelt.org in conjunction with the upcoming public meeting.  We will send you a link when the site has been updated.

 

True, ODOT has collected extensive public input, much of which wasn't included in the project (more effective land use strategies, adding commuter rail, etc.). But most of these don't fit within ODOT frame of familiarity (or Burgess & Niple's) and were rejected. The short answer to all of this is that ODOT lack of creativity when it comes to the Innerbelt bridge and Central Interchange alignment is nothing short of bizarre. They were very creative in coming up with the traffic circle for the Quigley Road Connector, at the south end of Tremont, as a traffic-calming technique for cars and trucks coming off I-71. They deserve credit for that. But that is far overshadowed by their intransigence on the bridge/Central Interchange issue. I just don't understand why they've dug in their heels on that, when it's indefensible.

Nah, they have to honor Cleveland's wishes as, under Ohio's Home Rule law, municipalities dictate land use within their jurisdictions.

I got interesting tour today of the Central Interchange area by a public official who I will not name, since I'm not sure he wants me to use it. However, here's a couple of things I learned and don't mind saying before writing about it in an article (cuz it's more important that these developments get publicized -- not who publicizes them)....

 

> At the east side of the Cuyahoga Valley, there's a "Western Reserve fireman's museum" in the old, dirty sandstone building at the triangular corner of the Hope Memorial Bridge and the east approach to what was the Central Viaduct. The curators of that musuem have some pretty impressive plans for developing that musuem -- which was a central receiving point for citywide fire alarm call boxes. The dispatching control panel in that building is an amazing piece of brasswork and cannot be replicated anywhere else. The new bridge ODOT proposes to build for westbound traffic only would come up to within perhaps 10 feet of the south side of that building, and quash the musuem's plans for developing that site.

 

> At the west end of the Cuyahoga Valley, the massive, concrete cold storage building that's on the north side of the existing viaduct also has a development plan. Its owner was told early on by ODOT in the Innerbelt process that there were no plans that would affect his building. So, he has proceeded to secure financing to convert the cold storage building into more than 300 housing units. Now, ODOT is telling him that the new westbound-only bridge would require demolition of the cold storage building. The building's owner is appealing for help from local Congressfolk -- he initially wrote to Kucinich, but learned that district lines were redrawn and is now in Tubbs-Jones' district. So he is appealing for help from her.

 

So much for ODOT saying that their plans for the Innerbelt would respect the memorandum of understanding between the city and ODOT:  that the project will leave the city no worse off than before. It appears the only option to respect that memorandum is to relocate the Innerbelt's Central Viaduct on a new bridge south of the existing one.

I hope he contributed to Tubbs, otherwise he is SOL

wow, that's big news!  I know that this forum represents a really minute sample of Cuyahoga County residents, but this has to be widely disseminated!  KJP, you have the means to do it through the WSSN.  Stephen Litt is doing his part as architecture critic at the PD.  I know I'm planning to go to the meetings next week and voice my opinions as a resident.  I really hope more information like this gets out there and people/legislators/etc. come to the best decision!

I've been trying to get in touch with Gateway to see if we can get some downtown resident turnout.

Sounds good. I hope they turn out. Try contacting Tom Yablonski to see what he says about five noisy lanes of the Innerbelt moved immediately across the street from Jacobs Field. It would be relocated close enough to Carnegie that it would require the demolition of Tri-C's headquarters.

how are these things so lost on the ODOT people???  How is it possible for them to approve this so blindly???  rhetorical questions...

 

on a side note, what do we make of Frank Jackson having his election night party at the Greek Orthodox Church in Tremont? I've heard he's not really psyched about the southern alignment because of the assumption that it will take money from the Opportunity Corridor, which he supports.  If he'd actually responded to either of my two letters, I might have a better idea of what he was thinking!

He's not psyched about the Innerbelt, period. He needs to hear that the southern alignment would improve the chances for the Opportunity Corridor by allowing ODOT land to be sold (generating $40 million to $100 million) and the city to raise significant revenues from its (The Mother Of All TIFs?) return to the tax duplicate.

"Attend this Public Open House to Learn about ODOT's Recommended Alternative for Cleveland's Future Innerbelt."

 

ODOT will be gathering your comments at this meeting and over the coming months about the design detail and the social/environmental/economic impacts of the Cleveland Innerbelt Plan's Recommended Alternative.  This will assist ODOT in developing modifications as further analysis is performed and impacts assessed. ODOT is interested in all feedback about the Recommendation.

 

Thursday, November 17, 2005

Open House from 4:30 - 8:30

Presentation at 6:00

 

CSU's Wolstein Center (formerly the Convocation Center)

2000 Prospect Ave.

Cleveland, OH 44115

 

for more info, visit www.innerbelt.org

 

In addition, the City's Design Review Board will discuss the Innerbelt at 1:30 in City Hall and it will be discussed again at 9am on Friday at the City Planning Commission.  Attend one or all of these events and weigh in on the discussion!

Everyone, this meeting is your chance to express thoughts about the new bridge! Let's work for something beautiful and not merely functional.

event posted at http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=6068.0;topicseen

Here's the web link for the Western Reserve Fire Musuem at Cleveland....

 

http://www.clevelandfire.us/museumhome.htm

 

This is what they want their building to look like when done....

 

 

This was a motorcycle ride fundraiser they held for the musuem, which raised more than $9,000 -- the Inner Belt can be seen in the background. In the foreground, the five lanes for the new bridge, plus the entrance ramp from Ontario, would occupy the entire foreground....

 

 

Here's another view, looking toward Jacobs Field. A working fire station is at left....

 

I wrote to Mr. Hebebrand earlier this week expressing my concerns with ODOT's plans for the innerbelt, and today I received this email in response:

 

"Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your comments and concerns.

 

The City of Cleveland is the Ohio Department of Transportation’s decision-making partner regarding the reconstruction of the Cleveland Innerbelt which includes I-90 from the Innerbelt Curve south to the I-90/I-71 split. ODOT considers Cleveland to be its partner in this endeavor and has no intentions of making decisions without their input and consensus, as well as the input and support of the Greater Cleveland community at large.

 

A broad-based advisory committee is currently overseeing the development of the overall Innerbelt reconstruction plan.  The Cleveland Urban Core Projects Advisory Committee, co-chaired by Craig Hebebrand, ODOT Project Manager and Mark Ricchiuto, City of Cleveland Public Service Director, is comprised of community and city leaders and serves as an advisory body to ODOT.  The Committee is guiding ODOT and the City through the next four steps of the ODOT Project Development Process (PDP), just as the original Innerbelt Scoping Committee served as the guiding authority during the first four steps of the process, starting in 1999.  The PDP is a 14-step process which will culminate with construction.

 

In regard to the Innerbelt Bridge, The Ohio Department of Transportation shares your belief that Cleveland deserves a bridge worthy of its rich history and befitting its skyline.

 

Please be advised that the selection of a team to conduct a structure type study for the new bridge carrying I-90 over the Cuyahoga River Valley near downtown Cleveland is scheduled to begin on November 21, 2005 and is scheduled to conclude on December 12, 2005. 

 

The selection committee will include representatives from the City of Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Federal Highway Administration and the Ohio Department of Transportation.  The selection process is based on qualifications.  Once selected, the successful team will develop for further consideration, a minimum of four structure types: truss, box girder, extradosed and cable-stayed.  The Ohio Department of Transportation with its partner, the City of Cleveland, will then conduct a series of public meetings over the next year (2006) to gather public input on the various structure types being considered.

 

With respect to alternative alignments for the new bridge, ODOT has previously considered alignments both upstream and downstream of the existing structure.  The upstream (a.k.a. southern) alignment was fully considered prior to being removed from further consideration in June of 2005. Please note that the downstream (a.k.a. northern) alignment provides every opportunity to consider a full range of structure types for the new river crossing.

 

It is important to note that throughout the Project Development Process, ODOT has hosted many large public meetings as well as hundreds of briefings to community and business groups.  As the process continues, ODOT will continue to gather and weigh public opinion.  The public may make comments via the project website (www.innerbelt.org), via ODOT’s web site (www.dot.state.oh.us), through the U.S. Mail (Innerbelt Project Manager, 5500 Transportation Blvd., Garfield Hts., OH 44125) and in person at any ODOT-hosted public meeting.

 

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts and concerns.  Please be advised that next Public Meeting will be held from 4:30 PM to 8:30 PM on Thursday, November 17, 2005 at the Wolstein Center (formerly the Cleveland State University Convocation Center).  Additional information will be available via the Innerbelt web site at www.innerbelt.org in conjunction with the upcoming public meeting.  We will send you a link when the site has been updated."

 

Any ideas about who will be on the selection committee?  And, is the southern alignment really off the table?  I thought they were considering it again?

well, as we've seen with many public processes (i.e: the Convention Center), just because one day they say that an alternative is "off the table" doesn't necessarily mean that's the final word.  I think it would take the City really advocating for it to get it back on the table, which is why I concentrated my attention on City reps with my letters. 

 

By the way, where does Bob Brown weigh in on this issue?  I haven't heard word one from him and would imagine that his opinion is pretty significant as Planning Director.  Hunter Morrison (former Planning Director) wrote a great piece for the current issue of the Kent State Cleveland Urban Design Collaborative Quarterly.  I'd like to have him back in the driver's seat right now! (I don't believe the current issue is on line just yet, but past issues are available at http://www.cudc.kent.edu/Quarterly.htm and the current issue can be picked up at CSU's Levin College at 17th and Euclid and probably at the CUDC on Prospect & Huron.)

 

Also, Bob Brown is scheduled to speak at a real estate forum between 4-6 next Thursday, during the Town Hall meeting for the Innerbelt Plan!  What's up with that???

^ Probably free food! ;)

Hebebrand was in one of my classes the other day and said a southern alignment for the bridge had been ruled out because it would require too many takings in Tremont -- a neighborhood already deeply scarred by highway projects. He said the County Engineers are contesting that finding and want a southern bridge, but had so far failed to produce any kind of formal study showing substantial takings would not be necessary. Maybe if they could do that the southern alignment would be back in the picture.

I interviewed the guy who's raising funds and developing the design for the new firefighters' museum. Turns out that, while the museum itself isn't threatened, some of their ancillary plans for it are. They (like ODOT) would like to see the traffic detoured off Commercial Road hill. But while ODOT wants it detoured so they can build their four lanes of highway and the access from ramp from Carnegie/Ontario, the museum wants it closed so it can make into a pedestrian-friendly area that celebrates its history.

 

It would do so through interpretive exhibits, including images and maps of the old Central Viaduct, the industrial heritage, the Towpath Trail and make the museum into an educational facility. It would offer history about famous Cleveland fires (Collinwood school, Cleveland Clinic fire, East Ohio explosion etc) and offer instruction to children about fire safety. And, while the musuem building itself isn't threatened, the fire station next door would be, as the entrance ramp will come to within 10 feet of the fire vehicle doors. The musuem wants an active fire station next door. Nearly $100,000 has already been raised for the fire musuem -- it isn't some pipe dream. Some of the money came from Cleveland City Council.

 

By the way, our favorite PD architecture critic is also on this story, according to the guy I interviewed.

Maybe if they could do that the southern alignment would be back in the picture.

 

aarrgh. i hope so but i doubt it because everything about this process appears to me to have been pre-determined and that they are just going through the motions with the public. i hope some of you can go speak up at the public open house below.

 

from the 'odot innerbelt plan' mailing i got the other day:

 

cleveland innerbelt plan

public open house

thursday, nov 17th, 2005  430pm-830pm

csu wolstein center

 

 

 

 

^Yup, that's the event I posted at http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=6068.0.  The flyers seems to be getting good circulation, but I, too, feel that this is just ODOT going through the motions.  From what I've heard in recent days, ODOT and B&N are each saying that the decision's been made and that there was ample time for public input over the past couple years.  I think the only thing that could throw a wrench in the works at this point would be for Alsenas/Cuyahoga County/City of Cleveland to come up with some funding for another engineering study to prove that the southern alignment is as effective, less damaging and creates more opportunities than the current choice. 

 

Any chance of this happening?