"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center.  It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers.  This is urban design 101 stuff.

I'm not arguing in favor of "rural quietude", I'm saying I enjoy having a conversation in a fairly normal tone of voice in my backyard or on the sidewalk with my neighbors. I'm sure there are exceptions but I would imagine most people living in the city would like that too. Asking people to take an extra couple minutes on a prettier calmer road so that the people living along this route can do that doesn't seem like such a big inconvenience to me.

"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center. It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers. This is urban design 101 stuff.

 

I can see how that applies to Detroit Avenue, but... who window shops for tugboats and bulk salt?  And considering Detroit's right up the hill, how much window shopping do we really intend to add here?  There's also the RR tracks issue someone raised earlier.  Will those be calmed too?  It's a main freight line between NYC and Chicago where we also hope to run more passenger trains... maybe pedestians aren't equally appropriate for every single ROW.  And this isn't like the I-90 bridge where there's no parallel option for pedestrians or cyclists.  For the innerbelt I think ped/bike access is paramount.  I really think there's a fundamental distinction here.

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?

 

If there are already backups to 117th, then why would it matter if the speed limit is 35 or 50?  No one can get up to that speed anyways.  So when its busy, the traffic won't move any slower than it does now, because its not going much faster than 35 now.  When its not busy, it will only take about 1 min longer (2 miles @ 35mph vs 2 miles @ 50mph)

"Calm traffic" does indeed happen in an urban center. It happens any time that a decision is made to de-emphasize movement of traffic through an area and rebalance the street system towards other street users and function like pedestrians or bicyclists, or cafe diners, or window shoppers. This is urban design 101 stuff.

 

I can see how that applies to Detroit Avenue, but... who window shops for tugboats and bulk salt? And considering Detroit's right up the hill, how much window shopping do we really intend to add here? There's also the RR tracks issue someone raised earlier. Will those be calmed too? It's a main freight line between NYC and Chicago where we also hope to run more passenger trains... maybe pedestians aren't equally appropriate for every single ROW. And this isn't like the I-90 bridge where there's no parallel option for pedestrians or cyclists. For the innerbelt I think ped/bike access is paramount. I really think there's a fundamental distinction here.

 

I was only pointing out that calming traffic can and does happen in urban settings, and is often desirable.

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?

 

I do logistics software for a living, why don't you explain

 

And really explain how going from 50 mph to 35 mph is a 50% reduction.....

 

Also explain why your commuting issue trumps my quality of life issues, because It really doesn't affect me negatively if you are stuck in your driveway on clifton.  Having to drive from 70th to 45th or the end of the shoreway does.  Having to drive to either place to simple get my car down to the park that I can throw a rock and hit is ridiculous. 

 

Perhaps Cleveland should design Cleveland streets to benefit people who live in Cleveland and not those who live in the suburbs especially since the 'burbs and its people have made it eminently clear that Cleveland is a wasteland they want nothing to do with.

 

Driving to 73rd instead affects me and everybody living in Edgewater, detroit shoreway and cudell positively.  Having traffic an 1/8 of a mile away going 35 instead of 50 does, more trees in the sea of concrete does.  Being able to bike along it does. So how much does that count?  2 minutes? 5 minutes?

 

don't like your commute, move or change jobs.

 

You want to drive 60 MPH go up to 90.

I'm not arguing in favor of "rural quietude", I'm saying I enjoy having a conversation in a fairly normal tone of voice in my backyard or on the sidewalk with my neighbors. I'm sure there are exceptions but I would imagine most people living in the city would like that too. Asking people to take an extra couple minutes on a prettier calmer road so that the people living along this route can do that doesn't seem like such a big inconvenience to me.

 

May I suggest West Park, for that purpose?  We're talking about a major industrial seaport with a highway and a busy rail line running through it.  Take away the highway and you really haven't changed much about the character of the area, not in the direction you're looking for.  There may be a low ceiling in that direction, really.  That's why I'm suggesting [benefit = small].  If nobody wants to believe me about [cost = big] I can live with that.  But if nothing else, please recognize that we're talking about a highly industrial port area.

 

I'm seeing a pattern recently... this isn't the first time I've taken the stance that not every quality-of-life development fits perfectly into every given industrial zone.  Did anyone seriously buy in Battery Park on the assumption that sometime soon there would no longer be a tugboat factory and a gigantic mining operation across the shoreway from it? 

 

Sometimes I feel like things are placed willy-nilly in Cleveland because there is such fierce resistance to considering the relationships of anything to anything.  So if "trendy urban development item A" is a cool idea on its face, and it worked great in an upperclass residential section of Berlin, then it's equally great for every possible location in Cleveland-- regardless of context.         

 

Ksonic99: 

 

Explain what?  Why I think travel time would double when speed is halved?  Why I think backups would take twice as long to clear if speed were halved?  That's not logistics, that's arithmetic.  If further explanation is needed let me know.

 

Qualifications-wise I don't want to get specific about my resume in an online forum.  I may have used your software before, and if so, cool.  But I would rather have you think me a liar than broadcast 327's secret identity to those who might recognize certain details. 

 

Ksonic99:  Because I don't want to get specific about my resume in an online forum.  I may have used your software before, and if so, cool.  But I would rather have you think me a liar than broadcast 327's secret identity to those who might recognize certain details.

 

well that is fine.

 

I choose to give your opinion 0 weight then.  You are more than welcome to do the same to mine.

 

and much like urban dwellers have heard since the fifty's  On this item, you have lost, get over it.

At this point, I think you two should either take it to PM or simply move on.

moved on.

 

to

 

allocating revenue on a billed, empty, total miles algorithm with 11 variables.

 

 

Likewise... I'm exhausted!  And your software intrigues me.

The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no?  Speed limits for short drives (which this is) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.

The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no? Speed limits for short drives (which this) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.

 

Correct, the speed limit shouldn't be an issue if there are no grade crossings.  Just slap a few speed cameras along there, and you'll have some extra revenue from the impatient ones (there will be many) who "just can't afford" that extra 90 seconds on their commute.

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.

 

Yes.  I was talking about Farimount as it relates to Clifton Blvd, and the Shoreway.  When they decided to (eeh gahst a traffic engineers worst nightmare) take a whole lane of rush hour traffic away from Cedar Hill from 4 to 3, did we see cataclysmic backups that destroyed property values on Fairmount? Nope.  The vast majority of the people who live on that section of Clifton are completely behind a shoreway blvd conversion as well as a blvd conversion of Clifton, with a tree lined median that calms traffic.  Most can't wait for this and think it will drive reinvestment in the neighborhood and help property values.  Call it Fairmount West.

 

We're talking about a major industrial seaport with a highway and a busy rail line running through it.  Take away the highway and you really haven't changed much about the character of the area, not in the direction you're looking for.  There may be a low ceiling in that direction, really.  That's why I'm suggesting [benefit = small].  If nobody wants to believe me about [cost = big] I can live with that.  But if nothing else, please recognize that we're talking about a highly industrial port area.

 

I'm seeing a pattern recently... this isn't the first time I've taken the stance that not every quality-of-life development fits perfectly into every given industrial zone.  Did anyone seriously buy in Battery Park on the assumption that sometime soon there would no longer be a tugboat factory and a gigantic mining operation across the shoreway from it? 

 

Sometimes I feel like things are placed willy-nilly in Cleveland because there is such fierce resistance to considering the relationships of anything to anything.  So if "trendy urban development item A" is a cool idea on its face, and it worked great in an upperclass residential section of Berlin, then it's equally great for every possible location in Cleveland-- regardless of context.         

 

 

Are we really calling this area a "major industrial seaport"?  Yes, there's a big salt mine, and a tugboat factory. The vast majority of that area is Edgewater Park, 2 marinas, and Whiskey Island.  With planned pedestrian linkages along the riverfront with a pedestrian bridge to whiskey island.  The vast majority of our "major industrial seaport" is to the east of the river and looks to be moving further east.  Are we seriously to think these willy nilly ideas of reclaiming industrialized lands overlooking the waterfront for prime residential and pedestrian usage, should be tossed aside because of the "relationships" of decisions to heavily industrialize them a century ago (even if it made sense then).  Or should we work to erase those now mistakes and reclaim this area in a productive way? 

 

You obviously look at this from a traffic engineering point of view.  That's fine, but I don't think you'll find most urban centric folks (particuarly planners) agreeing with you.  Really I guess it's a moot point.  This is moving forward, and I somehow doubt this is going to turn into US-405 in Califronia ("the parking lot").  I guess we'll see.

All that I know is that access to Wendy Island needs to be improved dramatically.  I don't commute on the West Shoreway so, personally, I have no dog in that fight.

The Shoreway from West Blvd to E 6th is less than 3.5 miles, so slowing down from 60mph to 40mph should reduce free flow traffic travel time from about 3.5 minutes to...5 mins, no?  Speed limits for short drives (which this) are a lot less important than congestion-related stoppage and traffic lights.

 

It's shorter the further east you live.  Conversely, the further west you live in Lakewood, the more cumulative delay you will experience from this.  West Blvd is almost the end of the commute for a lot of people.  It was for me. 

 

On the inbound morning commute, conditions on this final stretch affect the entire road... not just the freeway part where the speed is to be changed.  At current speeds, problems on 6/20/2 can back up well into Lakewood.  Cut that speed in half, have something happen to close a lane or two temporarily, and the morning backup might reach anywhere from Bunts to West Clifton.  I'm guessing that's a worst case scenario, but it's conceivable, especially if 90 is also torn up.  Backups reaching west of 117th are not a projection at all... they were almost a daily occurrance within the past couple years.

The shoreway's current grade and the slope of the surrounding areas will never allow for development along most of its path. The reduction in speed to 35 mph, is not a big deal IMO, however when cars start to drive along it at 35mph, it will feel like your car is idling because of perspective. There is no need for such low speeds when there are no neighboring buildings. Next time you are on driving on I-90, reduce your speed down to 40 and see what it feels like. That's exactly what it will feel like on the shoreway.

 

What also irks me is the tree lined boulevard concept! Trees lining the shoreway is the last thing we need. I thought the purpose was to create nice views, not grow towering trees that will completely block the view of the lake in a few years. It's not like we are Miami or LA with long slender trunks of Palms with a small canopy frawn.

 

Also, Why are we developing a road that is at least a 1/4 mile inland for pedestrian access? We don't need to be able to walk along the shoreway. We need to be able to walk along the SHORE. Why can't we fix up those sea walls that are lakeside to the Marina and convert into a beautiful boardwalk that extends into Whiskey Island? Then from there, create a pedestrian bridge over the Cuyahoga into downtown and the proposed new Flats East Bank development?

 

The last thing the shoreway needs is pedestrian access. Keep the shoreway for cars, develop the shore for people. A few more pedestrian bridges/tunnels from the Detroit-Shoreway Neighborhood to the lakefront is what is needed.

My wife and I live north of Detroit on W. 54th and we're looking forward to having access to the shoreway/blvd right at our street, as well as a multipurpose trail to travel.  I think our property value will benefit as well.  And if bicycles are allowed on the blvd, that'll be a great ride.  All good stuff...

Just to clarify, the speed limit on the shoreway between W.6 and West Boulevard is 50 mph.  The speed limit will be decreased by thirty percent.  The shoreway has never really been a full speed freeway on the west side. 

WestBLVD I like your style.  You don't put tight clothes on a fat man.  I know the speed limit there is 50, but... very few people obey speed limits on freeways.  It's more like 60-70 there under normal conditions.  The guy going 50 might as well be a deer carcass.  The west shoreway may hook up with Clifton on one end, but it literally becomes I-90 on the other end.  There's no ramp or interchange, it's a seamless transition.  Do we really expect traffic coming westbound from I-90 to go from 75 to 35 as they pass Browns Stadium?  As far as national jokes go, dead man's curve will pale in comparison. 

 

Welcome to downtown Cleveland!  This way: dead man's curve.  The other way: dead man's sudden and desparate braking, even though it looks like the same road he's been on and nothing seems to have changed except OH MY GOD IS THAT SPEED LIMIT SERIOUS?  Am I on an exit ramp?  Is there a brick wall up ahead?  Oh, there's an exit, I'll try and turn around.  This can't be right.  Wait... did I just get off in the projects?  They put projects right on the lake?  I guess I'll just keep going the way I was.  OK, this looks like some kind of a... family recreation area... wait, no... I think it's a salt mine.  Is it both?  What the hell?  This isn't a town, this is random elements dumped out of a bag! 

^Do you really think people around the nation are having a laugh about the I-90 Dead Man's Curve?  Doesn't every city have a bend that they call DMC?  The Jan and Dean song is about a DMC in LA.

If it is planned correctly, the transition from freeway to roadway won't be as jarring. I'm not saying it has been planned that well, but it could be. As an example I -480 ends and turns into St Rt 14 in Streetsboro and within a mile drops from 65 (though most traffic is doing 75) down to 35. I used to drive through there everyday and never had a problem transitioning. I don't see why it would be so much harder here.

 

Though I do have to say, if they're not going to bother with intersections, 45 would seem more reasonable even for a tree lined boulevard.

 

^ If the posted speed limit is 35, reality tells us that people can and will do 45.

The posted speed and the traveling speed are 2 different things.

 

Whatever you want it to be, post it lower.

The last thing the shoreway needs is pedestrian access.

 

I disagree.  Do you work for ODOT?

Regarding the tugboats and salt mines, isn't the point of a project like this to look to the future?  When Cleveland's quickly-shrinking industrial past is gone and the port moved east?  To make the entire lakefront more livable for residents with "new-economy" jobs?

 

Yes, new-economy jobs are worth having. But so are basic-needs mining operations, shipping and advanced manufacturing. All can and should co-exist here. I don't want to see anyone forced out by this project.

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. :)

 

I hope you didn't throw the butt outside!  :-D

 

^ If the posted speed limit is 35, reality tells us that people can and will do 45.

The posted speed and the traveling speed are 2 different things.

Whatever you want it to be, post it lower.

 

Agreed.. I always said the same thing regarding speed posts.

I used to live in the suburbs north of Detroit and frequently commuted on Woodward Ave.  I think that's a similar situation to what might become of the Shoreway.  Speed limit was 45 mph, it was 4 lanes in both directions and moved through a commercial corridor.  Traffic moved very swiftly and in most cases was a better commute than the freeway.  There were cross traffic intersections at most mile & half mile marks, but traffic still moved pretty much uninterrupted.  It had a landscape median and sidewalks on either side.  Pedestrian crossings were very dangerous though, as you essentially had to get across 8 lanes of traffic in a short amount of time.  I think 2 people were killed at the intersection of 12 Mile Road & Woodward in the time I was there.  Very busy intersection for cars & pedestrians.

I've managed to drive the speed limit on the shoreway and I haven't even died.

Woodward Avenue is Detroit's equivalent to Euclid Avenue... a better comparison might be High Street in Columbus, although Woodward is much bigger than either of those.  But in any case, it's the main street of the entire city and is lined with commercial uses.  It hits the downtown of upscale Birmingham and other rich residential areas, after passing through miles and miles of Parma-like inner ring suburbs.

 

Admittedly Woodward gets a little freeway-like just south of Pontiac, but for the most part it's a (huge) surface street with 10 miles of city on either side.  It has intersections because it's smack in the middle of a massive street grid.  Other than a tiny piece in Highland Park, Woodward Avenue is NOT industrial, and at no point is it physically hemmed in like the west shoreway. 

 

It bears no resemblance --at all-- to a freeway along a lakeshore with heavy industry on one side and a steep bank on the other.  I would be pretty strongly against trying to replace our shoreway with something like Woodward Ave... because there's no way we could transport the rest of the central column of metropolitan Detroit to our west shoreway area. 

 

Context means everything.

Wouldn't the best comparison be to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago?

WestBLVD I like your style.  You don't put tight clothes on a fat man.  I know the speed limit there is 50, but... very few people obey speed limits on freeways.  It's more like 60-70 there under normal conditions.  The guy going 50 might as well be a deer carcass.  The west shoreway may hook up with Clifton on one end, but it literally becomes I-90 on the other end.  There's no ramp or interchange, it's a seamless transition.  Do we really expect traffic coming westbound from I-90 to go from 75 to 35 as they pass Browns Stadium?  As far as national jokes go, dead man's curve will pale in comparison. 

Welcome to downtown Cleveland!  This way: dead man's curve.  The other way: dead man's sudden and desparate braking, even though it looks like the same road he's been on and nothing seems to have changed except OH MY GOD IS THAT SPEED LIMIT SERIOUS?  Am I on an exit ramp?  Is there a brick wall up ahead?  Oh, there's an exit, I'll try and turn around.  This can't be right.  Wait... did I just get off in the projects?  They put projects right on the lake?  I guess I'll just keep going the way I was.  OK, this looks like some kind of a... family recreation area... wait, no... I think it's a salt mine.  Is it both?  What the hell?  This isn't a town, this is random elements dumped out of a bag! 

 

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

 

You lost me, Fonzie.

Are we really calling this area a "major industrial seaport"? 

 

Are we seriously to think these willy nilly ideas of reclaiming industrialized lands overlooking the waterfront for prime residential and pedestrian usage, should be tossed aside because of the "relationships" of decisions to heavily industrialize them a century ago (even if it made sense then).  Or should we work to erase those now mistakes and reclaim this area in a productive way? 

 

Regarding the tugboats and salt mines, isn't the point of a project like this to look to the future?  When Cleveland's quickly-shrinking industrial past is gone and the port moved east?  To make the entire lakefront more livable for residents with "new-economy" jobs?

 

We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

 

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.

 

EDIT: I hope this post makes more sense now.  It was originally intended as a direct response to these questions from the previous day, which had really gotten me thinking... but I neglected to put the quotes at the top, which kinda made it into of a random rant.  The last paragraph, however, was not responsive to any question.  It was more of a global point, but my transition is not well delineated.  Subheadings might even be appropriate here.  Oh well. 

 

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

 

You lost me, Fonzie.

 

[thumbs up] 

 

That's a good quip.  Now try articulating a position.

 

[rides off on bike]

Please tell this to the people living in battery park.

Please tell this to the people living in battery park.

 

I hope no one ever has to, and I trust that any needed remediation was done.  And every dollar spent on remediation is a dollar lost toward completing the project... at some point.  Battery Park has worked out.  SYC worked out, after a confusing drama with WalMart over who would pay for remediation.  City View, unfortunately, is flat out dangerous... and due to an oversight by the mayor, Garfield Heights is liable for the whole shebang, which I hope never actually goes shebang.

We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

 

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.

 

The above is display is what TV land likes to call "jumping the shark."

 

You lost me, Fonzie.

 

[thumbs up] 

 

That's a good quip.  Now try articulating a position.

 

[rides off on bike]

 

 

That was a funny response - I like the TV script format.  Truth be told, I'm nowhere near as articulate on things of this matter as you appear to be.  You made some great points - I just think they got lost behind some stretched numbers and your caps lock key.

 

I check out this forum to get some nice perspective on what's going on around town.  I'm a DS resident so this thread in particular interests me, as does the Shoreway project.  I see it as a benefit to those in the DS area.  I mentioned before that I live on W. 54th, so I'll get to enjoy not only an entrance to the new boulevard from my street, but also a multi-purpose trail and more access to Edgewater/Whiskey Island/etc.  The (potential) ability to ride a bicycle on the boulevard is also something to look forward to.

 

In my opinion, if you measure the positive impacts of the project versus the (potential) traffic issue - and that horse has been beaten dead - I think the project passes muster. 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm highly supportive of a new entrance or two from the Battery Park area, and that seems to be the main aspect of this people want.  I didn't think additional access was ever really controversial.  And I'm a lot more supportive of the plan as a whole since they dropped the at-grade intersections concept. 

 

Some people here seem to be fighting for the original concept, which was about as realistic as a Popeye cartoon.  I'm pretty sure that plan was already dropped, for some of the reasons I've been discussing.  The plan now is to pretty much keep the freeway format. 

 

So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

Some people here seem to be fighting for the original concept, which was about as realistic as a Popeye cartoon.

 

It was realistic until ODOT got involved.

So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with. And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum.

 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.

So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.

 

and the median, and the........  ? :wtf:?

So... as I understand it, I'm the one who's advocating for the plan we're actually moving forward with.  And I know, Punch, that this officially means I'm ODOT scum. 

 

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but how is this even remotely true?  You've been bitching for the last 2 pages about the 35 mph speed limit and even claimed that peoples very livelihoods hung on whether or not the speed limit would be reduced.

 

The at-grade intersections issue seems resolved... though perhaps not permanently... and I believe many other aspects are still on the table, like the speed limit and the total project scope/cost.  Neighborhood access and traffic calming appear to be separate goals with separate merits.  My point there was that my positions on this are not tin-hat crazy, and that these issues have not already been settled to the contrary.

We need to accept that we do not get to repurpose industrial land any way we'd like.  It isn't an available choice.  Same goes for landfills... just ask Garfield Heights.  I know we'd like to move on as if the past never happened but I'm sorry.  This is the real world and the fact that land was industrial at one point, or is industrial right now, is a huge issue.  It can't be wished away.  Another example: We're having trouble completing the Towpath Trail because of a little ATOM BOMB factory that's been gone for years now.  This is serious stuff and it we ignore it at our peril.

 

Cleveland is not a clean slate.  We don't get to reinvent it.  We can make better decisions than our forbears, in some instances, and we can clean up some past mistakes.  But we don't get to change the fundamental layout.  We need to work within that layout, particularly in regard to current or former industrial areas. 

 

If nothing else, consider that it's inefficient and costly to constantly reinvent the wheel.  We can put industrial parks and "new industry" on these former factory sites a lot easier (and more safely) than we can put neighborhods there.  Meanwhile, Euclid Avenue is well suited to dense urban neighborhood uses... so we turn it into an industrial park.  Quit complaining about how life's not fair to Cleveland.  We choose the toughest, most expensive, s-l-o-w-e-s-t, and least logical path at every opportunity.

 

 

If you really mean this, I don't even know what to say to you.  If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

 

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.

Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

 

As I stated a few pages back, the tree lined concept seems kind of out of place as the purpose is to see the lake, not shroud it behind trees. It appears from the plan trees will only be planted on the south side, which already contain trees, just not in an orderly fashion.

 

I'm hesitant to believe that the pedestrian access will get much use. Anyone who lives in the Edgewater neighborhood of Cleveland will continue to use the nice paths that already exist along the beach cliff and then down the hill towards the beach and marina rather than using a proposed path along the shoreway. Residents in this area would have to go out of their way, away from the lakeside paths to use the shoreway side path to *enjoy* walking alongside a bunch of commuting cars. Folks who live in the Detroit Shoreway and Battery Park who currently use the tunnels at West 65th and West 76th will continue to use those points of entry to the park (albeit they should look nicer than they currently do). It should be pointed out, however,  that the entry point at West 65th is really nice as it is. When residents from these areas cross under the tunnels, they will most likely be headed towards the beach, marina, or Whiskey Island. It would be unlikely that a pedestrian would find it nicer to walk along the road once crossing under the tunnel versus using the already existing lakeside paths in Edgewater Park.

 

The proposed pedestrian route really only becomes a feasible entry point by non motorized means for those who live to the east of W 49th street as the shoreway pedestrian path is a direct shot to Edgewater. However, as any planner can tell you, a person is generally not willing to walk more than a half mile to get to their destination. Considering the park is a form of recreation, you can likely extend that distance a bit. However, since W 49th street is 1.2 miles from Edgewater Beach, it is unlikely the pedestrian use trail will get very high use in this vicinity.

 

The shoreway was designed to get people from the west side to downtown via car. The proposed redevelopment tries to force a pedestrian use out of the shoreway that is not warranted and not a feasible use for many local residents. I bike from the west side of Cleveland to downtown almost everyday in the summer and this proposed path does not even benefit me as the path still has to cross up to Detroit to cross over the Detroit/Superior Bridge, making it much easier and enjoyable to continue to bike down Detroit through the new Gordon Square district.

 

Perhaps this new shoreway will be good for our communities, but I truly believe that the shoreway should be left just the way it is and we actually use the money to develop a nicer SHORE.

Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

 

I have to agree with this line, if not much else that anyone here has been arguing about back and forth for the last few days.

If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

 

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.

 

I mean what I said, not what you said. 

 

Praying for industries to return has nothing to do with prioritizing land usage based on the nature and context of the land.  If you think that's asking too much then... we're at an impasse there.  And what buildings have I argued against reclaiming?  I mean, if I said it I said it, but what are you talking about?

 

And I never said we shouldn't remediate pollution.  I just said we don't have to do that before we build things, because we already have plenty of land to build those things on that doesn't need remediation.  Low hanging fruit means less upfront cost during a recession, thus more growth for our buck.  So yes, let's do the remediation... but let's do it with a higher tax base, let's not put it ahead of actual growth.

 

Instead we're putting new industry on Millionaire's Row... while putting neighborhoods and amenities where, in a thunderbolt of irony, industry happens to be the highest and best use.

"thunderbolt of irony".  I like that.  I am going to use it. 

Upon further inspection of the plan released a few weeks ago, it doesn't look like a lot really will change along the shoreway for the price tag.

 

I have to agree with this line, if not much else that anyone here has been arguing about back and forth for the last few days.

 

Then I guess you both missed the removal of both ramps at W. 25th and total reconfiguring of W. 28th?  Face it, a million doesn't buy much these days.

For comparison, l believe the work that was recently done with Route 8 around Macedonia cost around $250 million

If you really think we should just continue being the rust part of the rust belt and hope and pray for industry and manufacturing to show back up and save the day instead of reclaiming these buildings and land (particuarly by our water) for green, vibrant communities to help bring young people and families back into our city neighborhoods... well, good luck with that.

 

and... ummm... I'm quite familiar with the cost of remediation.  it is expensive and slow. and if we don't do it, we have no future.

 

I mean what I said, not what you said. 

 

Praying for industries to return has nothing to do with prioritizing land usage based on the nature and context of the land.  If you think that's asking too much then... we're at an impasse there.  And what buildings have I argued against reclaiming?  I mean, if I said it I said it, but what are you talking about?

 

And I never said we shouldn't remediate pollution.  I just said we don't have to do that before we build things, because we already have plenty of land to build those things on that doesn't need remediation.  Low hanging fruit means less upfront cost during a recession, thus more growth for our buck.  So yes, let's do the remediation... but let's do it with a higher tax base, let's not put it ahead of actual growth.

 

Instead we're putting new industry on Millionaire's Row... while putting neighborhoods and amenities where, in a thunderbolt of irony, industry happens to be the highest and best use.

 

  Well I guess I still don't know what you're talking about.  And I'm not exactly sure what "Millionaire's Row" has to do with the shoreway conversion and its development opportunities.  But Millionaire's Row died over a century ago.  Because, it was a residential area that was consumed by rapid development of commercialization and industry.  Which is what led to the development of Shaker Heights, wherein deed restrictions were put in place to keep commercialization and industry away.  The stretch of midtown you reference hasn't remotely been residential since.  And it is littered with decay of commercialization, industry and abandoned factories (what hasn't been torn down yet).  That land needs every bit of the expensive and slow remediation other areas do.  And there is not the slightest remnants of a residential neighborhood there.

 

  People's fascination with Millionaire's row always confounds me.  If someone proposed putting something remotely close to Millionaire's Row in Cleveland today it would probably be met with venom on a board like this.  Actually, Euclid Avenue wasn't even the first Millionaire's Row.  That distinction actually belonged to Water Street and Lake Road (currently W.9th St and Lakside).  Why was this area first built up as the homes for the elite?  Well it was because it sat on a bluff overlooking the river (on Water St. / W. 9th) and the Lake (Lake Rd. / Lakeside Ave.), and offered unparalled views of our greatest natural assets. Of course when these homes were gobbled up by commercialization and industry (late 1860's into the 1870's), most of those estates were rebuilt on Euclid Avenue until those were gobbled up by commercialization and industry (early 1900's-1910's), at which time most of the premier residential estates were built in Shaker Heights.  The photo below shows Cleveland's original lighthouse in 1872, at the corner of Water St. and Lakeside, pre shoreway, pre port land, when this was still the bluff.  The house you see behind it was one of the last homes left in this area, and as irony would have it, was the home of William Gordon.  That home was replaced by the National Terminals Building (there's that darn commercialization and industry again).  William Gordon started off in the hardware business, but rose to power and real wealth as a shipping magnate.  After amassing a fourtune in the shipping industry he did what a lot of tycoons did, development.  He moved his estate further east along the lakefront and upon his death deeded it to the city so long as it was always maintained as park land, giving us Gordon Park.  But he also mapped out an entire neighborhood on the near west side, now known as the Detroit Shoreway Neighborhood.  He built the Gordon Square arcade as the commercial centerpiece of this neighborhood, and actually w. 65th st, was originally known as Gordon Street.

 

  This thread started asking the question "how would the shoreway conversion, potentially affect development along it?".  It's a rapidly emerging neighborhood with a ton of great amenities.  It just so happened it's Northern terminus along the bluff was used for industry.  That industry is now gone.  One of the reasons that the Detroit Shoreway is primed to blossom and grow in a way few areas the rest of the city can fathom is because of that fantastic bluff. It's the same reason the original Millionaire's Row was located on the bluff downtown.  Unparalleled lake front vistas.  It's one of the main reasons Battery Park has been so successful.  The thought of course being that reimagining the shoreway, improving lake front access, and making the shoreway more pedestrian friendly and less of a barrier, can drastically accelerate what is already a blossoming and great neighborhood.  Buildings like the former Westinghouse Electric Factory can be reclaimed and added as additional high density residential to an existing neighborhood that already has the pieces in place to draw people.

 

  From a residents point of view, it's easier to be sold on moving in to a neighborhood that has residential and amenity infastructure in place.  From a developers point of view, because that infastructure is in place it's easier to pick off someone smaller scale projects and integrate them into the neighborhood, even phase them like battery park.  Where as areas like midtown have absolutely no neighborhood in place.  So if a developer starts small with a single building, it takes an enormous leap of faith on the residents behalf that a neighborhood will actually be created, knowing that for a while you are going to have very little around you.  Which is a big conondrum for the developer.  Ideally in such an area you would have to build some sort of mega development all at once, with hundreds and hundreds of units of housing, neighborhood retail and amenities.  And very unfortunately for us, the current lending climate makes that nearly impossible. Which means midtown lingers, but DS is primed for rebirth and growth right now by claiming the former industrial buildings on the bluff and improving pedestrian access.