I'm not sure what you're asking for. What is your vision for the Shoreway? Because whether the speed is 35 or 45, there isn't going to be development popping up along the roadway or a dramatic increase in a walkability score.

 

The roadway's geometry/curvature is designed for highway speeds. So people are going to drive at those speeds regardless of what a sign says (unless there will be police patrols 24/7). The roadway would have to be completely redesigned to intentionally sharpen the curves, including some very expensive bridge relocations, to slow down traffic. Adding three intersections will slow down traffic at a lower cost and without any property takings (reducing the environmental planning/remediation).

 

My desire is to be able to add bus stops along the roadway so that people can walk up to West Side High School, the mid-rises popping up along Detroit Avenue, Battery Park, The Edison, whatever replaces the HKM building, another redevelopment effort for Westinghouse, etc. as well as have better transit access to Edgewater Park.

Edited August 14, 20195 yr by KJP

3 hours ago, KJP said:

I'm not sure what you're asking for. What is your vision for the Shoreway? Because whether the speed is 35 or 45, there isn't going to be development popping up along the roadway or a dramatic increase in a walkability score.

 

The roadway's geometry/curvature is designed for highway speeds. So people are going to drive at those speeds regardless of what a sign says (unless there will be police patrols 24/7). The roadway would have to be completely redesigned to intentionally sharpen the curves, including some very expensive bridge relocations, to slow down traffic. Adding three intersections will slow down traffic at a lower cost and without any property takings (reducing the environmental planning/remediation).

 

Pie-in-the-sky, but I would like the Shoreway to not be a moat between the city and the lake.  Which means that I would like pedestrians to be able to cross without feeling like they are risking their lives to do so. 

 

Granted, there are areas along the lake right now that pedestrians may have little interest in accessing (ore docks, wastewater treatment, port docks, airport), but that's my general vision for the ideal.  I also realize that that is probably not a realistic goal in the near term.  I still think it has value as an ideal to work toward, even thought it is not very high on my priority list.

 

I completely agree that speed is dependent on roadway design more than whatever arbitrary sign we put up.  I do think we should introduce more intersections where it makes sense, introduce more curves, on-street parking, trees, narrow the lanes, add bike lanes, and introduce other traffic-calming measures where it makes sense (not on the bridge over the valley, for example, but maybe between the malls (hopefully extended over the tracks someday) and the museums).  

 

I referred to the walkability score of Brookpark road because you cited it as an example of an appropriate place for 45mph speed limits.  That may be appropriate on Brookpark Road, but my point is simply that a 45mph road is not a great place to be a pedestrian, and I think we do want pedestrians moving to and from the lake across the Shoreway -- at least in the places where it makes sense -- Edgewater, Browns Stadium, the museums, and hopefully more places in the future. 

3 minutes ago, Foraker said:

 

Pie-in-the-sky, but I would like the Shoreway to not be a moat between the city and the lake.  Which means that I would like pedestrians to be able to cross without feeling like they are risking their lives to do so. 

 

Granted, there are areas along the lake right now that pedestrians may have little interest in accessing (ore docks, wastewater treatment, port docks, airport), but that's my general vision for the ideal.  I also realize that that is probably not a realistic goal in the near term.  I still think it has value as an ideal to work toward, even thought it is not very high on my priority list.

 

I completely agree that speed is dependent on roadway design more than whatever arbitrary sign we put up.  I do think we should introduce more intersections where it makes sense, introduce more curves, on-street parking, trees, narrow the lanes, add bike lanes, and introduce other traffic-calming measures where it makes sense (not on the bridge over the valley, for example, but maybe between the malls (hopefully extended over the tracks someday) and the museums).  

 

I referred to the walkability score of Brookpark road because you cited it as an example of an appropriate place for 45mph speed limits.  That may be appropriate on Brookpark Road, but my point is simply that a 45mph road is not a great place to be a pedestrian, and I think we do want pedestrians moving to and from the lake across the Shoreway -- at least in the places where it makes sense -- Edgewater, Browns Stadium, the museums, and hopefully more places in the future. 

 

Agree 100%.   There is also some land that could be developed right up to the roadway (thinking along the south side near 49th, and the massive boat trailer parking near Edgewater Yacht club to start).   

 

If we really want to see high rises in the W 80's on former industrial sites, the area needs to be more conducive to access.   So more pedestrian friendly, and with less freight trains rolling through.  

 

 

17 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

Pie-in-the-sky, but I would like the Shoreway to not be a moat between the city and the lake.  Which means that I would like pedestrians to be able to cross without feeling like they are risking their lives to do so. 

 

Granted, there are areas along the lake right now that pedestrians may have little interest in accessing (ore docks, wastewater treatment, port docks, airport), but that's my general vision for the ideal.  I also realize that that is probably not a realistic goal in the near term.  I still think it has value as an ideal to work toward, even thought it is not very high on my priority list.

 

I completely agree that speed is dependent on roadway design more than whatever arbitrary sign we put up.  I do think we should introduce more intersections where it makes sense, introduce more curves, on-street parking, trees, narrow the lanes, add bike lanes, and introduce other traffic-calming measures where it makes sense (not on the bridge over the valley, for example, but maybe between the malls (hopefully extended over the tracks someday) and the museums).  

 

I referred to the walkability score of Brookpark road because you cited it as an example of an appropriate place for 45mph speed limits.  That may be appropriate on Brookpark Road, but my point is simply that a 45mph road is not a great place to be a pedestrian, and I think we do want pedestrians moving to and from the lake across the Shoreway -- at least in the places where it makes sense -- Edgewater, Browns Stadium, the museums, and hopefully more places in the future. 

 

In your vision, 35 mph makes more sense. I wasn't going that far, such as proposing development right next to the roadway, but I would certainly welcome that.

18 hours ago, Cleburger said:

 

Agree 100%.   There is also some land that could be developed right up to the roadway (thinking along the south side near 49th, and the massive boat trailer parking near Edgewater Yacht club to start).   

 

If we really want to see high rises in the W 80's on former industrial sites, the area needs to be more conducive to access.   So more pedestrian friendly, and with less freight trains rolling through.  

 

 

 

The boat launch ramp (and parking for the trailers) is a major access point to the lake for people who can't afford a yacht club/marina membership.  And is there going to be demand to build right next to the sewage treatment plant?

11 hours ago, bjk said:

 

The boat launch ramp (and parking for the trailers) is a major access point to the lake for people who can't afford a yacht club/marina membership.  And is there going to be demand to build right next to the sewage treatment plant?

 

I drive by that lot daily and 99% of the time it's completely empty except for the nicest of summer days.   In fact my dad and I used to put his boat in there--there is plenty of parking most days right at the top of the ramps without even using that overflow lot by the Shoreway.  

 

And in terms of the sewage plant, don't you know know Cleveland is a real life SIM City?   We'll just pick that up and move it to the new Port of Cleveland located at the old Burke Lakefront Airport! ?

 

All kidding aside though, nothing surprises me in this town.   $400K condos next to a treatment plant?   Sure!  They come with a 15 year abatement! 

The City of Cleveland has officially directed ODOT to remove all trees from the median of the west shoreway ☹️

4 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

The City of Cleveland has officially directed ODOT to remove all trees from the median of the west shoreway ☹️

I was up in Quebec City earlier this year and they had native wildflowers growing in the medians and alongside the roads. I don't see why we're so obsessed with grass in our medians/shoulders, get some color in there- especially if trees are out of the mix now.

I believe they will be replaced with some sort of bushes...but I don’t know the specifics.

1 hour ago, Enginerd said:

I believe they will be replaced with some sort of bushes...but I don’t know the specifics.

 

On 8/23/2019 at 9:02 AM, GISguy said:

I was up in Quebec City earlier this year and they had native wildflowers growing in the medians and alongside the roads. I don't see why we're so obsessed with grass in our medians/shoulders, get some color in there- especially if trees are out of the mix now.

 

Especially since it would save a lot of money -- potentially $30+ million per year -- the state currently spends on cutting grass along its highways.

https://www.cleveland19.com/2020/05/26/odot-addresses-perennial-problem-dead-trees-along-shoreway-cleveland/  

 

 

 

Edited May 27, 20205 yr by skiwest

I would have guessed planting new trees at the start of June meant these die too. The prep and planting should have been done a month ago while the weather was still cool and wet.

4 hours ago, Mendo said:

I would have guessed planting new trees at the start of June meant these die too. The prep and planting should have been done a month ago while the weather was still cool and wet.

 

I've been watching them the last few days--it seems like many of the trees are being replaced with grasses.  Unfortunately these won't slow down a car coming over the median at you at 65 mph.  ?

Cleveland's Main Avenue Viaduct - now a national landmark

 

In a recent issue of the Case Alumnus magazine, there was a little blurb on how the Main Avenue Viaduct (aka Memorial Shoreway Bridge) now a national landmark thanks to the efforts of Case professor Dario Gasparini. Some bridge highlights:

• Constructed in 17 months in 1938 and 1939, the Viaduct was the longest bridge America had ever seen — and for decades the longest elevated structure in Ohio
• Stretching about 8,000 feet from end to end, it carried the Memorial Shoreway over roads, railroads, factories, and the river to speedily connect the east and west sides of the city
...

“At the time it was built, it was extremely innovative,” said Gasparini, an expert in the history of structural engineering. “That span was a U.S. record when it opened in 1939. Nothing had been built longer in this country.”

...

Some of the viaduct's notable features include 10 spans of continuous cantilever trusses and overpass plate girders that were the longest ever built in the U.S. The various and distinct structures make it a viaduct, something more than a bridge, and a model of engineering innovation.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1J1m848olX9qk2nEUqdDhnSEPfRx79zY-/view

page 11

 

Hopefully the freeway portion downtown is removed but the bridge remains a connector over the river.

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Hopefully the freeway portion downtown is removed but the bridge remains a connector over the river.

 

That could be really cool. I had the rare opportunity to bike across it once following some friends in the Cleveland Marathon. A hail and then snowstorm broke out and it was just like a sheet of ice! 

 

If your idea does happen I'd welcome some pretty tall plexiglass around the perimeter, because it's actually pretty terrifying up there lol. 

9 minutes ago, surfohio said:

 

That could be really cool. I had the rare opportunity to bike across it once following some friends in the Cleveland Marathon. A hail and then snowstorm broke out and it was just like a sheet of ice! 

 

If your idea does happen I'd welcome some pretty tall plexiglass around the perimeter, because it's actually pretty terrifying up there lol. 

I’m still talking about it being a road. I’d welcome protected bike lanes. 

6 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

I’m still talking about it being a road. I’d welcome protected bike lanes. 

 

From what I understand the lifespan of the structure is close to the end. Does anyone have any indication of how long it could support vehicular traffic? 

I don't drive over that bridge very often, but when I do, I get very nervous.

6 hours ago, surfohio said:

 

From what I understand the lifespan of the structure is close to the end. Does anyone have any indication of how long it could support vehicular traffic? 

 

It's getting there. If the section through downtown is converted to a boulevard, I suspect the Main Avenue Shoreway bridge is not long for this world. It would require a replacement on the scale of the Inner Belt bridges, which cost $566 million each nearly a decade ago. The Shoreway bridge is longer but narrower. Perhaps this would be cheaper (minus the bridge to Whiskey Island)....

 

My favorite urban "freeway" experience in Ohio is driving the Shoreway west into the Downtown Cleveland/Warehouse District. 

 

Replacement would be quite a challenge with buildings built up on both sides. There was more room to work with the Innerbelt bridge, which still required demolition.

The best solution is to move the Shoreway to run parallel to the railroad tracks with a tunnel under the Cuyahoga River.   The cost of a tunnel is less than $100M.  The Main Ave Bridge can be removed which would open up a ton of valuable land for development.

 

1 hour ago, TR said:

The best solution is to move the Shoreway to run parallel to the railroad tracks with a tunnel under the Cuyahoga River.   The cost of a tunnel is less than $100M.  The Main Ave Bridge can be removed which would open up a ton of valuable land for development.

 

I've been in Europe for the last month where these kinds of projects are commonplace.  Rather than mow down historic neighborhoods around the city centre, there are large tunnels everywhere.   Yet somehow, in the richest country in the world, your idea will be shot down as "too expensive". 

I don't know, maybe I'm suffering from lack of imagination but I don't see a better alternative than repairing this bridge. My problem is I want to keep the bridge but at at the same time turn the higher speed East Shoreway into a boulevard and if I use a syllogism from my old college logic class (if this, then that) it doesn't work. So for me the choice is keeping the bridge and the Shoreway or losing the bridge but getting a boulevard. Using that logic I prefer the bridge over the boulevard because...a road is a road and a higher speed East Shoreway or a boulevard is still a road. which is a problem for lakefront access BUT if we're also connecting the lakefront with a landbridge the kind of road become irrelevant. That way we keep the bridge and also get to connect downtown with the lakefront. 

 

The Main Avenue Bridge is visually stunning. It connects east and west in a dramatic fashion. If it was lit properly it would also turn into a work of art at night. A sculpture. One giant work of art. We're going to lose that for...a tunnel? Or some kind of drawbridge as lake freighter's still need access upriver. In order to do that we're going to build a road that plunges down to the river, somehow crosses the river and then continues on to connect with the West Shoreway. In order to complete that stretch of road we would be placing a dagger into the heart of the Flats. We lose that big beautiful bridge and replace it with with a road that slices up the Flats. I don't think that's the way to go. 

2 minutes ago, cadmen said:

I don't know, maybe I'm suffering from lack of imagination but I don't see a better alternative than repairing this bridge. My problem is I want to keep the bridge but at at the same time turn the higher speed East Shoreway into a boulevard and if I use a syllogism from my old college logic class (if this, then that) it doesn't work. So for me the choice is keeping the bridge and the Shoreway or losing the bridge but getting a boulevard. Using that logic I prefer the bridge over the boulevard because...a road is a road and a higher speed East Shoreway or a boulevard is still a road. which is a problem for lakefront access BUT if we're also connecting the lakefront with a landbridge the kind of road become irrelevant. That way we keep the bridge and also get to connect downtown with the lakefront. 

 

The Main Avenue Bridge is visually stunning. It connects east and west in a dramatic fashion. If it was lit properly it would also turn into a work of art at night. A sculpture. One giant work of art. We're going to lose that for...a tunnel? Or some kind of drawbridge as lake freighter's still need access upriver. In order to do that we're going to build a road that plunges down to the river, somehow crosses the river and then continues on to connect with the West Shoreway. In order to complete that stretch of road we would be placing a dagger into the heart of the Flats. We lose that big beautiful bridge and replace it with with a road that slices up the Flats. I don't think that's the way to go. 

 

The big difference between the West and East Shoreways is the west is only a state route.    Most of the East is not only an interstate highway but part of the longest one there is, the main cross-continental route across the northern tier of the nation.

29 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

The big difference between the West and East Shoreways is the west is only a state route.    Most of the East is not only an interstate highway but part of the longest one there is, the main cross-continental route across the northern tier of the nation.

ALL of this discussion about the Shoreway is west of dead man’s curve - it is not an interstate highway in that portion. It is a dead end, obsolete, state highway that inappropriately divides the city from the lake. 

33 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

I've been in Europe for the last month where these kinds of projects are commonplace.  Rather than mow down historic neighborhoods around the city centre, there are large tunnels everywhere.   Yet somehow, in the richest country in the world, your idea will be shot down as "too expensive". 

If you have ever been to Williamsburg, the Colonial Parkway passes under the historic area through a tunnel.  And there are lots of tunnels under Washington DC.

2 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

If you have ever been to Williamsburg, the Colonial Parkway passes under the historic area through a tunnel.  And there are lots of tunnels under Washington DC.

I have been to both places.   The only thing that comes to the scale of some of the ones I've seen in other parts of the world is the "Big Dig" in Boston, which of course is famous for its cost overruns and doesn't help the cause for tunnels in smaller cities like Cleveland. 

1 hour ago, cadmen said:

I don't know, maybe I'm suffering from lack of imagination but I don't see a better alternative than repairing this bridge. My problem is I want to keep the bridge but at at the same time turn the higher speed East Shoreway into a boulevard and if I use a syllogism from my old college logic class (if this, then that) it doesn't work. So for me the choice is keeping the bridge and the Shoreway or losing the bridge but getting a boulevard. Using that logic I prefer the bridge over the boulevard because...a road is a road and a higher speed East Shoreway or a boulevard is still a road. which is a problem for lakefront access BUT if we're also connecting the lakefront with a landbridge the kind of road become irrelevant. That way we keep the bridge and also get to connect downtown with the lakefront. 

 

The Main Avenue Bridge is visually stunning. It connects east and west in a dramatic fashion. If it was lit properly it would also turn into a work of art at night. A sculpture. One giant work of art. We're going to lose that for...a tunnel? Or some kind of drawbridge as lake freighter's still need access upriver. In order to do that we're going to build a road that plunges down to the river, somehow crosses the river and then continues on to connect with the West Shoreway. In order to complete that stretch of road we would be placing a dagger into the heart of the Flats. We lose that big beautiful bridge and replace it with with a road that slices up the Flats. I don't think that's the way to go. 

Lol, don't forget that said bridge was shown while the Drew Carey show theme song was playing on the early episodes.  That has to count for something.  😄

5 hours ago, Cleburger said:

I've been in Europe for the last month where these kinds of projects are commonplace.  Rather than mow down historic neighborhoods around the city centre, there are large tunnels everywhere.   Yet somehow, in the richest country in the world, your idea will be shot down as "too expensive". 

 

Because it costs more to build infrastructure in America than it does in Europe. In some cases, five times more....

 

https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-08/why-building-roads-and-transit-costs-more-in-the-u-s

 

https://www.constructiondive.com/news/us-rail-projects-take-longer-cost-more-than-those-in-other-countries/605599/

 

7 hours ago, cadmen said:

I don't know, maybe I'm suffering from lack of imagination but I don't see a better alternative than repairing this bridge. My problem is I want to keep the bridge but at at the same time turn the higher speed East Shoreway into a boulevard and if I use a syllogism from my old college logic class (if this, then that) it doesn't work.

 

If the Detroit-Superior and Hope Memorial bridges weren't enough to accommodate traffic, I could envision an addition route through the Flats with a drawbridge, like this one. You would have to assume it would be a lot cheaper than retaining Shoreway bridge, which admittedly is awesome, but that price tag is crazy. 

 

https://bridgehunter.com/nj/ocean/1515151/

 

11 hours ago, cadmen said:

I don't know, maybe I'm suffering from lack of imagination but I don't see a better alternative than repairing this bridge. My problem is I want to keep the bridge but at at the same time turn the higher speed East Shoreway into a boulevard and if I use a syllogism from my old college logic class (if this, then that) it doesn't work. So for me the choice is keeping the bridge and the Shoreway or losing the bridge but getting a boulevard. Using that logic I prefer the bridge over the boulevard because...a road is a road and a higher speed East Shoreway or a boulevard is still a road. which is a problem for lakefront access BUT if we're also connecting the lakefront with a landbridge the kind of road become irrelevant. That way we keep the bridge and also get to connect downtown with the lakefront.

 

Repair/partial rebuild could be the most cost-effective approach. 

 

But I think we could have both a bridge and a boulevard.  Not ideal but better than the current situation.

 

If we assume that the span over the river has to be maintained at that height, maybe they could lower the western sections so that heading east the shoreway remains at ground level until about St. Malachi/W. 25th.  That would connect the Shoreway "Boulevard" to the street grid at W. 28th and W. 25th before rising to cross the river.  If it is truly treated like a boulevard, part of the reconstruction could include better looking side rails (and some pedestrian and bike lanes).  And maybe some observation spaces -- could be great views of the lake from there.

 

On the east bank, maybe you could bring the boulevard to street level somewhere around W. 9th and W. 3rd.  (I'd drop it to W. 9th and make the underneath Main St. a dead end/cul-de-sac part way up the hill.)

 

Add a land bridge or two across the railroad tracks and possibly also over the boulevard would give us that connection from downtown to the lakefront.

I like the tall bridge over the flats! It's cool! 

 

I'd keep the bridge, but I'd make it start at the W6 intersection (in a cleaned up fashion). That would create room for the landbridge. 

 

I'd also eliminate the on ramps at West Blvd. They serve no purpose, and take up a lot of potential park space. 

 

Those two things aren't radically transformative, but they'd make a big difference and I think are relatively feasible. Sort of an application of the 80/20 rule to the shoreway. 

7 hours ago, Ethan said:

I'd also eliminate the on ramps at West Blvd. They serve no purpose, and take up a lot of potential park space. 

 

I live right at a place where I use those on ramps often, but yes they're completely redundant and unnecessary.

The West Boulevard ramps were originally proposed to be eliminated but people living along Lake Avenue from West to Clifton complained to Councilman Jay Westbrook and got the city and ODOT to keep the ramps 

8 hours ago, KJP said:

The West Boulevard ramps were originally proposed to be eliminated but people living along Lake Avenue from West to Clifton complained to Councilman Jay Westbrook and got the city and ODOT to keep the ramps 

Letting the Lake Ave folks ruin a good thing once again 😪

Here is an article by our favorite reporter about ideas for land bridge and shoreway.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/08/new-ideas-for-cleveland-lakefront-land-bridge-proposed-by-green-ribbon-coalition-big-creek-connects.html

3 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Here is an article by our favorite reporter about ideas for land bridge and shoreway.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/08/new-ideas-for-cleveland-lakefront-land-bridge-proposed-by-green-ribbon-coalition-big-creek-connects.html

You can download the full report here:

http://friendsofbigcreek.org/Landbridge-Shoreway/

I vote for the concept which relocates the section of the shoreway to the north along the rail tracks.

 

Edited August 20, 20222 yr by LibertyBlvd

I love this shape...

 

 

But I HATE this elevation!

 

 

One of the main benefits to the land bridge is connecting some of the biggest tourist draws of downtown Cleveland to the city center. It won't effectively do that if it basically ends in a roof overlook. If we are going to reroute the roads in this area anyway, then let's do so in a way that allows us to 'land' the land bridge at ground level with a gentle slope right to the Rock Hall. 

 

I think this is actually a step backwards from the Green Ribbon Coalitions previous proposal, largely due to the fact that they did terminate at ground level.

 

 

 

 

It looks to me like GRC proposal is bending over backwards to both keep the shoreway, as well as accommodate the Rock Hall's expansion plans as designed. Perhaps, if we remove Erieside Ave, as in the Haslam's plan, there will be space to properly land the land bridge.

 

 

Even if not, removing the Shoreway also opens up additional land for development that could be used for a Rock Hall expansion. 

 

Any plan that doesn't remove the flyover and rebuild Erieside and Shoreway into a walkable city street is a colossal failure.

 

Edited August 20, 20222 yr by Mendo

On 8/19/2022 at 9:57 AM, LibertyBlvd said:

Here is an article by our favorite reporter about ideas for land bridge and shoreway.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/08/new-ideas-for-cleveland-lakefront-land-bridge-proposed-by-green-ribbon-coalition-big-creek-connects.html

Turn the existing Main avenue Bridge into a pedestrian and bike greenway?? By god, do it dammit! DO IT!!

9 hours ago, Ethan said:

Even if not, removing the Shoreway also opens up additional land for development that could be used for a Rock Hall expansion.

 

6 hours ago, Mendo said:

Any plan that doesn't remove the flyover and rebuild Erieside and Shoreway into a walkable city street is a colossal failure.

 

The GRC's efforts to expand the study area west are to be applauded, heartily, because connection to the lakefront can't be done well without rethinking the Shoreway and how it connects to the west. 

 

While I wasn't a fan of the Opportunity Corridor, now that it's built I wonder whether it might be an experienceable-example of what the Shoreway could become -- still connected to I-90 on the east, still a major roadway, but a boulevard with slower speeds, trees, gentle curves, and pedestrian access.  The elevation change from downtown to the Rock Hall may make the design of the land bridge and street connections more difficult, but not impossible.  Thank you GRC for pushing for including the west side access into this conversation.

 

 

On 8/20/2022 at 8:32 AM, Mendo said:

Any plan that doesn't remove the flyover and rebuild Erieside and Shoreway into a walkable city street is a colossal failure.

 

 

On 8/20/2022 at 4:44 AM, Ethan said:

Even if not, removing the Shoreway also opens up additional land for development that could be used for a Rock Hall expansion. 

 

If a land bridge is built, does the shoreway need to become a walkable city street?  There would still be the rail tracks to deal with. Perhaps just address the flyover and Main Avenue bridge and keep the remainder of the shoreway as is.  Although I would also suggest eliminating the E 9th interchange and building a new one to the east, perhaps at E 18th. Then, Erieside and North Marginal could be relocated slightly south to open up space for Rock Hall expansion and other development. It might also allow for a more easily accessible Amtrak station to be built closer to E 9th.

 

Edited August 21, 20222 yr by LibertyBlvd

Great to see Ronayne beating this drum. Remove the Shoreway between the Main Ave bridge and the innerbelt. Build the land bridge over the rail at a lower cost because of no highway to clear, and reconnect downtown to the lakefront. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Great to see Ronayne beating this drum. Remove the Shoreway between the Main Ave bridge and the innerbelt. Build the land bridge over the rail at a lower cost because of no highway to clear, and reconnect downtown to the lakefront. 

 

 

 

Replied directly to the tweet with some obvious questions.

5 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Replied directly to the tweet with some obvious questions.

How many people use this freeway on a daily basis?    
A: Not enough to justify having it cut off downtown from the lake. I want to be clear that I’m not a “remove all highways” person. That said, I think the Shoreway is different than many other downtown highway. For one, it isn’t a through highway. The only place someone actually saves time by using it is trips originating or ending in northeastern Lakewood and Edgewater. And even for them, 90 isn’t that far out of the way. For this small target audience, we’re willing to completely cut off the western side of the city and downtown from the lake? It’s a BAD highway. 

 

How much would it cost to just remove it?  
A: That will have to be studied before it’s executed. But there will be many financial benefits, too. New land will be open for development and therefore collect property tax. The landbridge will be less expensive when it only has to go over railroad tracks instead of also clearing the highway. Milwaukee and Rochester have had very positive impacts from removing downtown stub highways. 
 

Where would the $$ come from?

A: The infrastructure bill and IRA have money for highway removal. 
 

This is a great opportunity for Cleveland. 

6 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

How many people use this freeway on a daily basis?    
A: Not enough to justify having it cut off downtown from the lake. I want to be clear that I’m not a “remove all highways” person. That said, I think the Shoreway is different than many other downtown highway. For one, it isn’t a through highway. The only place someone actually saves time by using it is trips originating or ending in northeastern Lakewood and Edgewater. And even for them, 90 isn’t that far out of the way. For this small target audience, we’re willing to completely cut off the western side of the city and downtown from the lake? It’s a BAD highway. 

 

How much would it cost to just remove it?  
A: That will have to be studied before it’s executed. But there will be many financial benefits, too. New land will be open for development and therefore collect property tax. The landbridge will be less expensive when it only has to go over railroad tracks instead of also clearing the highway. Milwaukee and Rochester have had very positive impacts from removing downtown stub highways. 
 

Where would the $$ come from?

A: The infrastructure bill and IRA have money for highway removal. 
 

This is a great opportunity for Cleveland. 

 

I am all in favor of removing the Shoreway, but something I haven't seen discussed much is how this will affect traffic on I-90. Westbound traffic is going to be coming in and either entering a lower speed blvd or deadman's curve; in all lanes traffic is going to have to slow and during rush hour that is going to backup down the highway. 

 

To lay my cards on the table. The Shoreway is only half the problem, I-90 needs to be rerouted to I-271 to I-480 back to I-80/90. 90 is cutting off near-eastside neighborhoods from the lake and downtown. 

16 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

I am all in favor of removing the Shoreway, but something I haven't seen discussed much is how this will affect traffic on I-90. Westbound traffic is going to be coming in and either entering a lower speed blvd or deadman's curve; in all lanes traffic is going to have to slow and during rush hour that is going to backup down the highway. 

 

To lay my cards on the table. The Shoreway is only half the problem, I-90 needs to be rerouted to I-271 to I-480 back to I-80/90. 90 is cutting off near-eastside neighborhoods from the lake and downtown. 

 

Most of that area is industrial or commercial until you get to Gordon Park, then the freeway cuts south of Bratenhal.   Past the water plant you get to my area.   The freeway is a good half mile south of the lake there and it keeps getting further.  

13 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

I-90 needs to be rerouted to I-271 to I-480 back to I-80/90. 90 is cutting off near-eastside neighborhoods from the lake and downtown. 

Not sure about funneling more vehicles onto i-271 and I-480.  They are traffic nightmares already.