Actually the tunnel at 76th is relatively clean & graffiti free.  But the problem stems from the tunnel itself, so long, dark, water problems...  keeps most of the foot traffic out.  Once the (crumbling) steps are replaced with ramps for bikes, it'll get alot more traffic and help keep the bad elements out.

 

 

"Sidewalk Superintendent extraordinaire"  LOL!  :clap:

As a resident of this area, I was thrilled back in the spring when the "Battery Park" lettering was illuminated on the smokestack at the old powerhouse.  Unfortunately the lettering hasn't been lit up for a couple weeks now.  Probably switched off due to cost.  On a good note, there has been a bit of activity at the Powerhouse lately, meetings with the developer and others, presumably to take a look at leasing the space for office or storefront or restaurant. 

 

Anyone who's not familiar with this building should really swing by and check it out.  It's received a facelift to the tune of almost $1 million, in new roof, windows, floor and complete tuckpoint of all the masonry.  Just sitting empty now though, waiting for a lease, then they'll finish up the sitework and build out the interior.

Anyone have an update to the project, particularly the West 76th Street tunnel renovation?

 

Thanks!

Actually the tunnel at 76th is relatively clean & graffiti free. But the problem stems from the tunnel itself, so long, dark, water problems...   keeps most of the foot traffic out. Once the (crumbling) steps are replaced with ramps for bikes, it'll get alot more traffic and help keep the bad elements out.

 

Many times the tunnel does have graffiti on it.  After numerous calls made by some of the Battery Park residents to the City, council person Zone's office and the Safety Director for the Detroit Shoreway area the tunnel has been added to the "graffiti patrol" that is done periodically. 

 

As for the "adopt a tunnel" plan, well I think some of us have.  We personally have cleaned the tunnel twice along with a group of others.  When we walk we take trash bags with us and pick up.

 

The tunnel is dark -- more of us need to continue to call CPP and the City to get the lights repaired. 

 

Does anyone know of any updates to the schedule to renovate the tunnel?  I had heard that it was "unbundled" from the overall Shoreway project but I am not sure what that means.  Any information is much appreciated!

 

 

does anyone know when the west bound lane (northern most lane) will reopen from the sewer rebuild? 

 

i thought it was only a 12 week project or something throughout the summer, but it doesn't appear that much has been happening on this segment for the past few weeks.

Still looking for any updates to the status of the tunnel at W 76.  Thanks!

West Shoreway project gets a boost from Ohio lawmakers

By Aaron Marshall, The Plain Dealer

January 25, 2010, 6:00AM

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A long-awaited $60 million road project designed to transform the fast lanes of the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard got a key assist from state lawmakers last week.

 

 

Rep. Michael Skindell, a Lakewood Democrat, got language slipped into an unrelated bill that would drop the speed limit on a stretch of the West Shoreway, from 50 mph to 35. The bill passed the Ohio House Wednesday and now moves to the Senate.

 

However, drivers aren't likely to see the speed limit drop until about 2013, no matter when state lawmakers end up getting the provision enacted.

 

 

MORE AT http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/01/west_shoreway_project_gets_a_b.html

From Friday's Planning Commission meeting via Cleveland  vs. the World

 

"Developers are still working with ODOT to hammer out details of the  West 73rd curve leading to the West Shoreway. This will likely add more  usable space for the neighborhood. Work on the West 76 Street tunnel is set to start this spring. $1 million  has already been set aside for these improvements"

 

:clap:

 

Great news!  That combined with the restarted east bank of the Flats will create quite the stretch of activity in the west shoreway region!

any update on when the westbound lane by w45 will re-open?  this has been closed for quite a while for what was supposed to be an 8 week project...

I don't recall that ever being limited to 8 weeks:

 

"...lanes will be closed through mid-2010 so the Sewer District can replace a 90-year-old concrete culvert.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/01/west_shoreway_lanes_closed_for.html

I remember both figures, the 8 weeks and the mid-2010.  I think it was 2 separate projects and they did the 8 week one right before they started this one.  Could be wrong.  I just hope they have it done before they tear up the innerbelt. 

Nothing really new in this...

 

 

West 76th Street pedestrian tunnels to Edgewater Park to be renovated

By Karen Farkas, The Plain Dealer

February 14, 2010, 1:00AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Tom Beecher was walking to his West 80th Street home after his first day on a new job when he was struck by a westbound freight train while crossing the West 76th Street railroad tracks.

 

The 30-year-old man's skull was fractured and his right leg severed below the knee, according to a story in The Plain Dealer on March 10, 1909.

 

read on >>>

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/02/west_76th_street_pedestrian_tu.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure if this was posted on any other forums (a quick search revealed no results).

 

Arrived home from a trip to find a postcard mailing from ODOT advertising a public open house on the Cleveland Lakefront West plan scheduled for February 23.

 

Here's the details from the card:

 

February 23, 2010  5:00 pm-8:00 pm

Exhibits Open 5:00 pm

Presentation:  6-7 pm

Q&A 7-8 pm

 

Pope John Hall Gymnasium

Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church West

6928 Detroit Ave

Cleveland OH

 

www.buckeyetraffic.org/lakefrontwest

 

 

I personally won't be able to attend due to another trip, but would love to hear from any UO members in attendance about updates to the Shoreway plan.

 

 

 

 

Went to the meeting last night.  It was my first attendance at a public hearing on the matter.

 

Looks like ODOT is saying that the money is there for just about everythng *except* for the actual Shoreway transformation.  They gave a timetable for the tunnels and new connections.

 

I was a bit displeased that all of these new connections to the Shoreway Blvd are actually going to be ramps on and off. I was envisioning intersections.

 

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

 

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there.  (At least that was my take away)

 

 

 

The factory on Fr Caruso between 70th and 73rd wil be acquired to make the tunnel under the railway go through at (the equivalant of) about 71st in an S shape.

 

 

 

 

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

 

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there. (At least that was my take away)

 

 

If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work.  Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.

 

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

 

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there. (At least that was my take away)

 

 

If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work. Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.

 

I backtrack much further than that now to go from Battery Park to Don's Lighthouse to get on the Shoreway there.  If you would sell your house over something so trivial, you must be pretty set on moving.  This late in the game, that is their plan, that is what is going to happen.

 

I attended the meeting too and was really impressed with the creativity and level of design that was being added.  I think the lookout "pause points" are a great feature that will add alot to the project.  It's not so much about the Shoreway even becoming a boulevard I think, as it is all the other connections and improvements.

 

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...

 

The changes at W25/28th look pretty odd to me ....that was the only thing I heard any grumbling about from the crowd now.

 

There will be no Eastbound entrance to 2 from 25/28 anymore....will have to double back west to 45th and get on there. (At least that was my take away)

 

 

If this is indeed the case I would probably consider moving because I use that ramp everyday to get to and from work. Even though it would add only a few minutes to my commute, I am used to the quick access and would probably be very annoyed by the backtracking everyday.

 

I backtrack much further than that now to go from Battery Park to Don's Lighthouse to get on the Shoreway there. If you would sell your house over something so trivial, you must be pretty set on moving. This late in the game, that is their plan, that is what is going to happen.

 

I attended the meeting too and was really impressed with the creativity and level of design that was being added. I think the lookout "pause points" are a great feature that will add alot to the project. It's not so much about the Shoreway even becoming a boulevard I think, as it is all the other connections and improvements.

 

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end. I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...

 

I guess I should've mentioned that I rent and I was already considering a move to try out a new neighborhood.

 

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...

 

 

What were some of their complaints?  Anything legit or was it all anti-government spending Tea Party antics?

 

I did however want to smack some of the people who spoke at the end.  I realize it's a public forum and everyone is free to make their point, but have a clear concise question instead of rambling complaints, half of which didn't even relate...

 

 

What were some of their complaints?  Anything legit or was it all anti-government spending Tea Party antics?

 

I left after the first speaker. He (the same one who intermittantly booed during the ODOT presentation) pulled out a reem of loose leaf pater and started into a generalized anti-governemt rant, demanded that all of the land on which the water treamtent plant now stands be returned to the public, ranter a bit more, then demanded clousre of Burke.

 

I took off to go get drunk at the Parkview at that point ;)

For the most part, the vocal complaints weren't valid.  The rambling loon at the beginning, a few people later some woman basically launched into a history lesson and how the whole project was a waste of money as long as the city was losing population...  some valid complaints about historic preservation...  some still feel the 35 mph speed is a bust, others feel the road should get at-grade crossings with stop lights, traffic bedamned...

I love the argument of some folks that since the city is losing population nothing should be spent to make it better. 

 

Now in some cases I agree with them--spending money on tourist follies like aquariums and casinos are not what this city needs.

 

Attracting jobs and employers with large scale quality-of-life improvements for all residents (as I would consider this West Shoreway conversion) should be put at the forefront of our efforts.

The factory on Fr Caruso between 70th and 73rd wil be acquired to make the tunnel under the railway go through at (the equivalant of) about 71st in an S shape.

 

Marous/Vintage has an option on that building, so I suspect that negotiation should be fairly straight forward given their vested interest in the 73rd St. tunnel.

I have a lot of mixed concerns over the potential conversion. I use potential as we are still looking at 2013 at the earliest.

 

I have a hard time envisioning the shoreway as a place people will want to walk along. Sure, you can put in a grass median and add some decorative lampposts like every other streetscape project in America, but does that really improve the quality of life? Why would anyone want to walk along the shoreway, when they could use the paths that are actually at Edgewater beach?

 

The inaccessibility argument is also a bit of a stretch. Currently there are 3 pedestrian access points to Edgewater. These tunnels are not as bad as people make them out to be. Making at grade intersections could perhaps save 30-45 seconds to someone's drive time to the park.

 

I think this conversion to a blvd would be a great opportunity for Cleveland, but from everything I've seen the project looks ho-hum. Where's the creativity and ingenuity to actually make this a stunning project for Cleveland to brag about?

I love the argument of some folks that since the city is losing population nothing should be spent to make it better. Now in some cases I agree with them--spending money on tourist follies like aquariums and casinos are not what this city needs. Attracting jobs and employers with large scale quality-of-life improvements for all residents (as I would consider this West Shoreway conversion) should be put at the forefront of our efforts.

 

I agree about the argument thing.....Casino sentiment I also agree...But the Aquarium, a really good one is by no means a folly. Maybe Jacob's roadside attraction guised as an 'aquarium' yes...But for CA, which is a totally different story and a not-for-profit entity, I think we could benefit from producing a better educated public concerning local and worldwide aquatic ecosystems---and how they relate and how their good health is essential to our daily lives.

 

Had we had such a philosophy ingrained in our population and business community years back, we may never had to deal with the burden of enduring this "river burning, etc" image for 40 years. That certainly did nothing to help our economy either. An iconic, educational cultural attraction like an aquarium can attract visitors, residents, offer many community outreach opportunities, field trips from other areas, jobs, and have spin of development in many ways. It boasts of a more "evolved" city in a way.

 

I suggest visiting Chattanooga, Baltimore, Monterrey Bay, Newport, Shedd for starters--and visiting the new CA website. Betwen Pitt and Chicago, there is a spot for our own unique venue--unlike casinos saturating the entire midwest like Wal-Marts.

 

Yes, we should try to attract what you're saying.....Yes we need some big players/anchors as part of the puzzle..... but let's also note that if we also do more to stimulate and offer incentives for smaller, locally owned, or independent businesses that diversify our economy to the point it will breed stability, then I think that is also better than hoping, praying, waiting and wishing for The Lone Ranger of one big company that we build our whole world around, to ride in and save the day and us. Build it all around one big or a few...they fall, we all all. Diversity breeds stability in the 'economic ecosystem' as it does in the natural one. One or two entities take a hit...several others left to pick up the slack. 

^^Think of it as a west side Lakeshore Blvd.

I'm still not sold on this.  People will walk along it to the extent it's lined with people-friendly stuff.  Which means no.  There's no density down there at all and everything to the north is warm-weather-only... and as noted, already pedestrian-accessible from the south.  The renderings we've seen show minimal new development fronting the blvd.  I'm not sure this will accomplish anything besides angering everyone in the northern half of Lakewood who works downtown.  After conversion it will still be a commuter road, just a far less effective one.  Too much loss for too little gain.

Outside of the remaining parcels at Battery Park, the entire stretch of development leaves little room residential development. Much of the success of this project rests on the fate of Downtown Cleveland. As downtown loses jobs to Independence, Westlake, and I-271, the demand and desire to live in this part of Cleveland when the jobs are elsewhere is low.

 

I'd like to see this project take foot, but we can do a much better job with it than what the current plans are laying out.

I'm still not sold on this. People will walk along it to the extent it's lined with people-friendly stuff. Which means no. There's no density down there at all and everything to the north is warm-weather-only... and as noted, already pedestrian-accessible from the south. The renderings we've seen show minimal new development fronting the blvd. I'm not sure this will accomplish anything besides angering everyone in the northern half of Lakewood who works downtown. After conversion it will still be a commuter road, just a far less effective one. Too much loss for too little gain.

 

I disagree.  "Too much lost..."  What is being lost?  The argument about "angering Lakewood residents" and west side commuters doesn't hold water.  Reducing the speed to 35 mph from an assumed 60 mph (higher than posted) now along the 2-3 miles from Clifton to W. 6th will add maybe 2 mins.  Quite possibly less if you assume people will still drive 45 mph on the reconstructed blvd during rush hour times. 

 

Even if the traffic pattern is unchanged, the area is long overdue for a facelift.  Edgewater is one of Cleveland's best assets and should be promoted as such with better entrance signage, landscaping, lighting, etc.  This project will provide that.

 

The actual conversion of the Shoreway to a boulevard is the least important aspect of the project.  The improved connections for pedestrians and the multi-use paths is key to attacting development & investment back to the area.  While the project doesn't specifically create much NEW land for development (there is some new land created at W25th & Detroit), it will do more to make the area more attractive for sure.  The area of Herman from 65th to 49th will really improve from the project.  Business owners in the area will definitely benefit from the added traffic, even if it's only during "warm weather" months, which I'd rather define as April 1st to Nov 1st.  I think the housing in the area has already picked up based on this project as people have started to buy up some of the older homes that were bargains in the area.  These types of benefits are often unseen and difficult to quantify, but don't ever think they don't exist.

The inaccessibility argument is also a bit of a stretch. Currently there are 3 pedestrian access points to Edgewater. These tunnels are not as bad as people make them out to be. Making at grade intersections could perhaps save 30-45 seconds to someone's drive time to the park.

 

As previously stated, at grade intersections are not an option.  Every possible attempt results in major backups at rush hour periods and the amount of traffic is too dangerous for pedestrian crossings.

 

As far as the condition of the current tunnels, I think you should check again.  The tunnel at 65th is really the only decent one.  I think the safety concerns at the other two get exaggerated, but the tunnels at 76th & Clifton are barely acceptable to walk on.  The stairs are crumbling, they are dark, damp and have no bike/wheelchair/stroller access.  I think the new plans are a great step forward with creative designs and use of interesting materials.

Wouldn't this project open up all of the land directly north of the shoreway to development?  Looking at google maps there appears to be some nice sections of land that could be developed based on access to this new boulevard.

The actual conversion of the Shoreway to a boulevard is the least important aspect of the project. 

 

In that case it's a difficult cost to justify.  I'm in favor of promoting Edgewater, improving signage & lighting, ensuring pedestrian access, all that stuff.  Let's do it.  But if we don't have to tear up 6/20/2, if we don't have to stop traffic... let's not.  This town ain't dead yet and people have places to go.

 

I'd estimate the impact on commuters to be significantly greater than 2 minutes.  Thankfully at-grade intersections won't be involved... that idea was ludicrous.  If open highways were as ineffective as you suggest, there wouldn't be so many.  This issue holds SERIOUS water for Lakewood commuters.  I can't speak for anyone further west, and I really don't care what they think.  But many people in Lakewood don't want to be shoved further away from downtown, and that's what this kinda does.  It would negate a major benefit of living along 6/20/2.

"I'd estimate the impact on commuters to be significantly greater than 2 minutes. This issue holds SERIOUS water for Lakewood commuters. But many people in Lakewood don't want to be shoved further away from downtown, and that's what this kinda does."

 

Please expand on this.  I hear this argument so frequently but haven't fully understood it.  Are you talking about the inconvenience and slowdowns during construction?  Or after?

Are you talking about the inconvenience and slowdowns during construction?  Or after?

 

Have you ever commuted in the area we're talking about?  It means everything to some people, and I mean hardcore urbanites in Lakewood, not Avon.  Commuting is not just an exurban concern, it's an issue for a lot of people in Clevleand proper and the inner ring.

 

The answer to your question is both... during and after construction.  The during construction part is especially serious because 90 is about to be torn up too.  It would be a collosal planning blunder to do that simultaneously with this.  Furthermore there's just no reason to slow this road down, since it's wholly unnecessary for pedestrians to cross at grade... and the road itself is not remotely at grade with any of the  neighborhoods it's meant to help. 

 

Anytime you talk about changing people's commutes you're putting their very livelihoods on the table.  Not everyone who depends on this major artery will be able to adjust, or move, immediately.  There's gotta be a better justification for that than kind of upheaval than "Edgewater needs new signage."  Lovely.  Put up new signage, clean up the tunnels, maybe add another one or a bridge.

^I really think you're blowing this out of proportion.  So people's commutes might increase by 5 minutes.  Is that really going to put anyones "very livelihood on the table"?  And if this conversion leads to development ON the road then I think it is completely worth it.

 

I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum.

"I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum."

 

That part, I'm in absolute agreement with. But um... commuting "problems" in greater Cleveland... that's always good for a chuckle.

I commute that way daily.  I live in the area of Lake/Clifton so I'm very aware of the traffic speeds and how heavy it is at rush hour times. 

 

The issue of the I-90 reconstruction has also been brought up.  I can't believe it wasn't mentinoed at the last public meeting at Mt. Carmel, but considering Craig Hebbebrand of ODOT is the Project Manager for both projects, he is aware of the impact and has previously stated that they plan to redirect a fair amount of traffic to Rt 2 during the Innerbelt bridge construction.

 

I think what you and alot of folks are missing is the "calming effect" of slowing down the traffic, adding the landscape median, etc being promoted by the designers, and how it will make the area more desireable than having 60 mph traffic whizzing by.

 

Delays during construction are one thing.  I can't comment on that and won't even try.  But delays after it's completed I think are really going to be minimal.  Show me how an extra 2 mins in the morning & afternoon are too valuable for this project to go forward.  Or show me how delays are going to be significantly more than that because right now I just don't see it.  Of course we can also agree to disagree.  I'm unabashedly in favor of this project for alot of reasons.  Of course others feel opposite, fair enough.

When I used to smoke, I'd fire up a cigarette as I pulled out of my parking garage in Lakewood. I'd finish the cigarette as I got off the Shoreway at Lakeside.

 

Six minutes.

 

Still, when I'd be staying downtown for a while, I'd prefer to take the bus. :)

When the project was first mentioned I was all for the at-grade intersections, but have since revised my thoughts on this.  I do support a "Lakeshore Drive" feel--with additional access points for the neighborhoods but unimpeded traffic flow.

 

But I also don't kid myself....at this point I'd be happy if we could get Clifton repaved and new sidewalks/crosswalks as Lakewood has done.  Like many of Cleveland's street's it's in bad need of some TLC.

I guess we agree to disagree on the 2-minute figure.  My previous career was in logistical planning.  I'd rather not go into detail but trust me I'm not just grasping at straws here.  My estimate is subject to change based on particulars of the design... but to me, 2 minutes barely even accounts for randomness in a situation like this.

 

We also disagree substantially on the benefit of this "calming effect."  Personally I think it results from horses eating.  There's so little for pedestrians here that I'm not sure who is actually impacted by cars whizzing by.  And I'm not sure what desirability factors arise from backing up traffic.  In fact, if I were appriasing property along a commuter roadway where traffic was about to be intentionally hindered I would be negligent not to reduce the value.  This would be different if 6/20/2 were a residential capillary ending in a cul-de-sac... but it isn't. 

 

And there is virtually no property fronting this roadway because it's at a completely different grade from neighborhood areas to the south.  I don't see the connection between hindering traffic on this road and improving life for Battery Park, which is up a steep embankment from it.  What benefit does "traffic calming" on 6/20/2 provide specifically to Battery Park?  They can hardly even be called adjacent, let alone intertwined.

327 - You are correct about the Shoreway being on a differnt plan from Battery Park, but I can hear cars "whizzing by" plain as day from my neighborhood.  You make alot of valid points.  LOL at your "Horses eating" comment.

 

Cleburger - I am sooo with you on getting Clifton repaved to 117th.  I believe the powers that be are holding off repaving as long as possible because Clifton is slated to get the "boulevard" treatment as well with a landscaped center median, updated streetscape and bus stops too.  I don't have a timeline for construction but I know the project got federal stimulus money to start design on the project. 

I'm curious how property values have fared on Fairmont Blvd, a 35mph 'calmed traffic' main commuting artery.  I don't think residents there complain about it too much.  But I bet they'd go ballistic if someone proposed removing that median and increasing speeds to 50mph.

Generally speaking, decreasing the efficiency of auto traffic can have a positive impact on mass transit ridership.  Look at Chicago.  It's a pain in the a** to drive around there, Lakeshore Drive is backed up all the time.  But people who don't want to deal with it ride the train, take the EL, ride a bus.  In order for RTA service to improve, there has to be a supporting ridership, and making it a little harder to drive may help with that.  But that's for another topic.

I don't see the connection between hindering traffic on this road and improving life for Battery Park, which is up a steep embankment from it.  What benefit does "traffic calming" on 6/20/2 provide specifically to Battery Park?  They can hardly even be called adjacent, let alone intertwined.

Stand a hundred feet from a 55mph freeway, then go stand a hundred feet from a road with a 35 or 40mph speed limit. The difference is in the sound, and vibration.

 

For example, my house is about half a mile from a 5 lane 35mph road, and I can't hear a thing from that direction except the occasional siren. In the opposite direction about a mile away is a 6 lane 60 mph freeway that I can constantly hear a rumble from. If I walk to within a few blocks of that freeway, I can feel the ground vibrate when a large truck goes by. 

I'm a Lakewoodite that takes this route every day - so I have a direct interest in it. That being said, I can think of a couple of points

 

Aren't the advantages of at-grade intersections near Edgewater Park almost totally negated by the presence of a major rail line at a substantial height, running parallel? Even if the Shoreway wasn't there, you still have to do lots of either tunnelling or bridging to get through that.

 

In terms of vibrations, this is already a no-truck zone. RTA buses are the only large vehicles on this stretch of highway.

I'm curious how property values have fared on Fairmont Blvd, a 35mph 'calmed traffic' main commuting artery.  I don't think residents there complain about it too much.  But I bet they'd go ballistic if someone proposed removing that median and increasing speeds to 50mph.

 

Well, yes, there are houses right up on Fairmount.  Nobody's saying the section called "Clifton" that goes through the middle of neighborhoods should be 50 mph.  But no part of Fairmount is a commuting artery in the sense that the West Shoreway is.  Not even if you're commuting east to 271... and going the other way, Fairmount ends 5 miles out from downtown, in the midst of a dense neighborhood.  Apples & Oranges.

 

And as for encouraging transit ridership... why don't we just whip people with chains if they drive?  That'll learn em.  My take is that people are encouraged to use transit when it's practical to do so, like in Chicago.  Our problem isn't that the roads here are too good and need taken down a notch... it's that the transit isn't good enough.  And transit always sounds better when it's presented as adding options, not taking them away.

 

Re: vibration, welcome to the city.  Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day.  This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density.  If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that.  This here is a major city.

"I do agree with you that they need to coordinate with any I-90 construction to keep disruptions to a minimum."

 

That part, I'm in absolute agreement with. But um... commuting "problems" in greater Cleveland... that's always good for a chuckle.

 

I know right...!  Whenever I hear this from someone in Cleveland, Its almost a given that they have never lived anywhere else.

 

(also funny that your arguing whether it will 2 minutes extra or more than that on top of the usual 6 minutes, yeah that sure is gonna be a quality of life changer!!!  :roll:)

 

I can see it now.  People wanting to move in droves because of this awful convenience......  to??.....

 

I know when I lived in Lakewood, the drive along the lake into downtown was priceless no matter how long it took (I certainly would have welcomed a slower speed to take it in longer). 

Guys, you don't have to believe me, but the potential delay numbers are a lot bigger than 2 minutes or 6 minutes or anything like that.  You're cutting the speed by a factor of 50% and assuming the resulting delays will be a much smaller proportion.  Mathematically... how?  Recall that inbound backups here can stretch past 117th and trap people in their driveways.  Assuming, arguendo, that I'm even close to right about this, would it change anyone's view?  Is there any threshold amount of delay that would indicate a problem, or are commuting issues simply unimportant here because--generally speaking-- the area has less traffic problems than LA?

Re: vibration, welcome to the city. Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day. This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density. If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that. This here is a major city.

Now you're arguing in favor of sprawl?

Re: vibration, welcome to the city.  Passing freight trains can feel like earthquakes to hundreds or even thousands of people, several times a day.  This results from the confluence of industrial and residential density.  If you're looking for quiet earth... there's lots of that.  This here is a major city.

Now you're arguing in favor of sprawl?

 

If you expect city life to be quiet or free from vibration... then for you, yes.  Cities need density and effective transportation networks to be functional.  These core goals are at cross purposes with maintaining rural quietude.  Sprawl allows people live in relative silence and isolation from the rigors of commerce.  So if sprawl has to happen, I'd prefer that it not happen in the city itself.  Then all you have is sprawl.  Prioritizing rural virtues like quietude and "calm traffic" in an urban setting makes sprawl universal.  "Calm traffic" is really not an aspect of urban life.  Cities have action.  Cities have lots of people going places and lots of freight converging.  I think there's an extent to which these things, including their vibrational side effects, should be embraced.