I am for it being a boulevard with at grade intersection and no off ramps, with the land surrounding the new street being opened up for development and recreational space.  In other words, the original plan.

Amen punchin Pat.  Amen!

BTW, and slightly off topic, saw a survey team working Clifton over near W 115th a few days ago.  Anyone know what this might be now?

Probably related to this thread: ;)

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html

Probably related to this thread: ;)

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4446.0.html

 

I thought the BRT and/or median project was officially dead?

No, it's not dead. ODOT chose not to fund it in the 2011 TRAC recommendations. But RTA and the City of Cleveland are still very interested in it.

 

Consider it like one of many home improvements you want to make, but you couldn't get a home equity loan large enough to cover all the improvements. It doesn't mean you'll never make all of the improvements. You just won't be able to make them right now, or as you had originally to make them.

OK I'll take the latest version. I am not ready to turn down an 85 mill dollar project that we are not paying for. Besides the road will need to be replaced sooner than later. We are talking about a new road, new exchanges, improved access, new landscaped areas plus all of the badly needed cosmetic changes that come with a project like this. The attitude so often here is that if we don't get our way then we don't want it. But that's not how it works, things will  be negotiated, needs will be discussed. And just to remind everyone, there is no extra monies anywhere. Plus as time goes by the price will continue to rise. Even as it is presented now it will greatly improve the area. The bike path issue was worked out with the innerbelt project, I see the same result here.

A public meeting will be held Thurs Dec 1st at Fulton Community Church, 1688 Fulton Road, 6-8 pm.

 

Project update & community dialogue on transforming the West Shoreway into a landscaped lakefront boulevard.

 

On another note, progress this week on landscaping, railings and other finishing touches on the tunnel projects at Lake & 76th.  Still need to complete the work at 76th between the RR tracks & the Shoreway, but the upper section in Battery Park and the lower section in Edgewater are pretty well done.  Maybe I'll get some photos up this weekend.

Darnit I'm going to be out of town.  I hope someone can post some minutes of this meeting!

Please be encouraged to fight the good fight in the comments sections...

 

Bait and switch: Ohio transportation officials need to stop putting up roadblocks as Cleveland tries to transform the Shoreway and its lakefront: editorial

Published: Saturday, November 19, 2011, 9:40 AM

The Plain Dealer Editorial Board By The Plain Dealer Editorial Board

 

 

ODOT officials have moved the goal posts so often that Clevelanders from Mayor Frank Jackson on down have every right to feel disrespected and to wonder what it will take to complete a project that promises to revamp the city's relationship with its lakefront.

 

Most recently, after Cleveland city planners attempted to trim costs by shaving the once-ambitious plans yet again, ODOT informed them that the price tag had unexpectedly gone up again -- almost doubling since their last estimate. So at the suggestion of top ODOT officials, the Jackson administration applied for another $28 million through the department's review process for identifying priority projects -- and promised to come up with an extra $7 million from the city's limited capital funds. But when ODOT scored the city's request, it was near the bottom of 72 proposals.

 

ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.

 

 

The ODOT committee that makes funding decisions meets Dec. 15. Its members need to take a long, hard look at both the commitments they have already made and at the staff's latest, skewed analysis of the Shoreway project.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html

ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.

 

Because ODOT doesn't count economic impacts in dollar amounts, but in traffic counts. The first economic impact study ODOT ever did for a highway project was in 2005 for the Inner Belt, but only after pressured into it by the community. And it was a bush-league economic impact study that didn't understand the concept of net economic impact on a regional scale. ODOT believes that any project which moves more vehicles faster IS economic development, and damned any walking, bike-loving, city-inhabiting anti-American commie who says otherwise!

On a side note, I went down to Edgewater this morning to take pictures of the lower tunnel entrances at Lake & 76th.  The park is such a mess, I had to struggle to find a shot that didn't have overgrown weeds, dead branches lying around, or graffiti.  What a shameful mess.  Trees & branches that blew down from the storm in August still lay around, fences are rusted apart & falling down, the shelter houses look a mess. 

On a side note, I went down to Edgewater this morning to take pictures of the lower tunnel entrances at Lake & 76th.  The park is such a mess, I had to struggle to find a shot that didn't have overgrown weeds, dead branches lying around, or graffiti.  What a shameful mess.  Trees & branches that blew down from the storm in August still lay around, fences are rusted apart & falling down, the shelter houses look a mess. 

 

Your state government at work. Or sleep, in this case.

I'm sure their maintenance budget has been halved and halved again, but it's still a disgrace to see that piece of property neglected.  I'm embarrassed to take people down there now.

I'm sure their maintenance budget has been halved and halved again, but it's still a disgrace to see that piece of property neglected.  I'm embarrassed to take people down there now.

 

And I expect anti-city Johnny K is hoping we'll all stay away. Anyway, back to the highway project.....

Oh it's on:

 

Cleveland Mayor Jackson, council members blasting ODOT for handling of West Shoreway project

Published: Monday, November 21, 2011, 12:06 AM

Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio --

 

Flashing rarely seen anger, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson said he is outraged by the way ODOT is treating the city's long-held dream of converting the West Shoreway into a tree-lined boulevard.

 

But an ODOT spokesman indicated the city's pursuit of more money for the project faces long odds -- especially when Cleveland wants to reduce speed "on a perfectly good roadway."

 

They were shocked by the low score the city's $28.2 million request for the project's second phase has received in early reviews from state transportation officials.

 

ODOT is too focused on moving traffic and undervalues the project's benefits to the community, city officials said.

 

"I honestly believe they don't want it to go forward," Jackson said in an interview at The Plain Dealer.

 

In fact, more state money will be hard to come by, given that ODOT has already committed $50 million to the shoreway project, ODOT spokesman Steve Faulkner said Friday afternoon.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/11/cleveland_mayor_jackson_counci.html

But they continue to throw money away on new highway sound walls in Mentor on route 2 for a development built years ago, AFTER the highway was built! They knew they were buying next to the highway! Pisses me off. Also, does the Lake County route 2 project switching to asphalt after originally using concrete have anything to do with the new head of ODOT's connection to the asphalt industry?

But they continue to throw money away on new highway sound walls in Mentor on route 2 for a development built years ago, AFTER the highway was built! They knew they were buying next to the highway! Pisses me off. Also, does the Lake County route 2 project switching to asphalt after originally using concrete have anything to do with the new head of ODOT's connection to the asphalt industry?

 

Neighbors usually don't ask for sound walls, ODOT puts them in to comply with federal requirements whenever there's a federally funded change to the design of a highway. The community can opt out of them if they know they can opt out.

 

Not sure about the choice to use asphalt on Route 2.

 

Both are good issues to discuss in the ODOT thread.

I shouldn't do it to myself, but reading the comments on the latest PD articles really shows how uneducated people are about the scope & intent of this project...  it's a shame.  Many more people would support it if there was better efforts to inform and create interest among the many west siders who just zip along...

I shouldn't do it to myself, but reading the comments on the latest PD articles really shows how uneducated people are about the scope & intent of this project...  it's a shame.  Many more people would support it if there was better efforts to inform and create interest among the many west siders who just zip along...

 

I wonder how many of these commenters are from the 'burbs?

Seems like a lot from Lakewood. There afraid there quick drive through Cleveland will be taken away from them.

Please be encouraged to fight the good fight in the comments sections...

 

Bait and switch: Ohio transportation officials need to stop putting up roadblocks as Cleveland tries to transform the Shoreway and its lakefront: editorial

Published: Saturday, November 19, 2011, 9:40 AM

The Plain Dealer Editorial Board By The Plain Dealer Editorial Board

 

 

ODOT officials have moved the goal posts so often that Clevelanders from Mayor Frank Jackson on down have every right to feel disrespected and to wonder what it will take to complete a project that promises to revamp the city's relationship with its lakefront.

 

Most recently, after Cleveland city planners attempted to trim costs by shaving the once-ambitious plans yet again, ODOT informed them that the price tag had unexpectedly gone up again -- almost doubling since their last estimate. So at the suggestion of top ODOT officials, the Jackson administration applied for another $28 million through the department's review process for identifying priority projects -- and promised to come up with an extra $7 million from the city's limited capital funds. But when ODOT scored the city's request, it was near the bottom of 72 proposals.

 

ODOT also gave the project low marks for economic impact, even though more than $400 million has been invested in Battery Park and the Gordon Square Arts District in the past few years -- much of it based on the promise of a boulevard. That is unfair to investors who have acted in good faith based on the state's promises, and blind to how older cities regenerate.

 

 

The ODOT committee that makes funding decisions meets Dec. 15. Its members need to take a long, hard look at both the commitments they have already made and at the staff's latest, skewed analysis of the Shoreway project.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/11/bait_and_switch_ohio_transport.html

 

Your state government at work---perpetuating the status quo by insisting on more roads---and working against areas that want alternatives. I really think the only solution for NE Ohio is to bypass the state's anti-urban tendencies and find ways to go it alone on this and many other issues. The state is not going to help.

 

Cleveland Mayor Jackson, council members blasting ODOT for handling of West Shoreway project

 

It's good to see the city step up to fight for this project.  I hope they will continue to fight for the original vision of this corridor (and not what was submitted in the last TRAC application).  The city's current proposal for phase II is the one that removed much of the bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure - or at least reprioritized it to unfunded status.

 

My fear is that even if money is found for this project, it is so far gone from the original vision in the early 2000s of multiple intersections, retail, residential, multi-modal access, etc.

 

The original concept of at least a few at grade intersections and much improved pedestrian and bicycle elements needs to be put back on the table.  IMO, you can't create a boulevard just by lowering the speed limit and planting some trees in the middle for $35million - you need to actually have pedestrian and bicycle access, and open up additional land for development and other uses.  Otherwise, you've basically just created a "nicer" limited access highway, perhaps with a lower speed limit.

 

Lowering the speed limit to 35mph and putting in a few landscaping elements doesn't make it a boulevard. The problem is this is still being touted as a lakefront development plan when that vision died years ago. Putting a median and another bike path on a highway that at points is 3/4 of a mile away from the lake is hardly lakefront development. Why isn't the city fighting for the full fledged plan or at least the possibility of going back to it?

 

I want Clifton Blvd and its mix of apartments, houses, shops, and restaurants extended along this new boulevard. Where is this plan?Where are the current designs that show this? Now that would be a development plan versus some absurd 100 million dollar median.

 

This city and every suburb (Can you believe not one city from Lorain to Mentor decided to put in a strip of commercial development along its lakeshore!) is to blame for poor planning, past and present.

 

The reality is that all of the lakeshore is occupied by something. If you want to develop it, you have to remove something or extend the shoreline farther into the lake. We are afraid to touch that subject, so instead we tout inland projects as lakefront to skirt the obvious. The only way that a boulevard conversion here will work is if we sell off/lease parts of Edgewater Park for private development. Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

Lowering the speed limit to 35mph and putting in a few landscaping elements doesn't make it a boulevard. The problem is this is still being touted as a lakefront development plan when that vision died years ago. Putting a median and another bike path on a highway that at points is 3/4 of a mile away from the lake is hardly lakefront development. Why isn't the city fighting for the full fledged plan or at least the possibility of going back to it?

 

I want Clifton Blvd and its mix of apartments, houses, shops, and restaurants extended along this new boulevard. Where is this plan?Where are the current designs that show this? Now that would be a development plan versus some absurd 100 million dollar median.

 

This city and every suburb (Can you believe not one city from Lorain to Mentor decided to put in a strip of commercial development along its lakeshore!) is to blame for poor planning, past and present.

 

The reality is that all of the lakeshore is occupied by something. If you want to develop it, you have to remove something or extend the shoreline farther into the lake. We are afraid to touch that subject, so instead we tout inland projects as lakefront to skirt the obvious. The only way that a boulevard conversion here will work is if we sell off/lease parts of Edgewater Park for private development. Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

 

And exactly where is the money coming from?

 

And exactly where is the money coming from?

 

Well, my last sentence was just a plan ... about as pie in the sky as Jane Campbell's plan. However, the baby steps of actually developing the Shoreway for development is a realistic option that wouldn't cost the city insane amounts of money.

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path?

 

Increased connection and pedestrian access points to the existing neighborhoods, increased recreation options with new multi-use paths, increased safety by redesigning the 25th/28th interchange, increased vehicle access to the Gordon Square & Battery Park neighborhoods which are currently only accessed by backtracking from Clifton on the west or from east coming off 49th/Tillman.  I can tell you first hand the residents of these existing neighborhoods are overwhelmed by the increased traffic these new developments have brought.  A new outlet is needed in the worst way.

 

Perhaps it would be beneficial if everyone went back & read the latest ODOT presentation on the project before commenting....  http://www.dot.state.oh.us/projects/ClevelandUrbanCoreProjects/LakefrontWest/Presentations/Documents/86478_2010-02-04_Design_Review_Presentation.pdf

 

^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

 

Me too.  Well put.

 

 

Article from RustWire:

 

ODOT to Cleveland: Drop Dead!

23 November 2011

 

There periodically arise big moments in urban development—moments that can affect a city’s life course. Here in Cleveland we are at one of those moments. The issue is whether or not we can finally break through the walls that have divided us from the Lake.

 

http://rustwire.com/2011/11/23/odot-to-cleveland-drop-dead/

One more:

 

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/11/23/ohio-a-state-dot-that-try-to-doesnt-hide-its-total-disregard-for-bike-ped/

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

 

I disagree.  The last thing Cleveland needs is another "pocket" of development that is unconnected to any other growing areas of the city.  The Shoreway conversion is a great opportunity to FINALLY have connection in Cleveland.  For too long there have been these small pockets of development for urban pioneers (Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit Shoreway, etc) that never fully grow to their potential and connect to the others.  I see this as an investment in connection of already existing neighborhoods that will only lead to drawing more people into the city.  People that would have been previously frightened of those "nether regions" in between currently existing pockets of new and revitalized housing.    Imagine Ohio City finally connected to Detroit Shoreway connected to Clifton/Edgewater.  Game changing.  No marina can offer that.

^I don't understand your point. Are you saying these areas aren't connected already? Certainly not in the literal sense. If you are talking about robust development linking all these neighborhoods, that is a tall order to ask any one project to spur.

^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

Me too.  Well put.

 

I get that alot of people on this board & elsewhere feel like the Shoreway project doesn't go far enough to create lakefront development but if it remains a concrete divided highway, that development will NEVER happen.  This project needs to go forward so that sometime down the line, the basics are there to allow development along a 35mph boulevard....

 

 

Let's face it, Edgewater park is a mess. It's too big too maintain. Too many areas are just never used and there's a lot of wasted space that would make a great waterfront district. I'm all for reducing Edgewater's size for the benefit of this boulevard and actually having interaction with, gee, the lake.

 

 

I agree with you! The state is an absentee landlord. I've floated the privatize argument before an you know what, it scares people. So does the prospect of charging admission, which I disagree with. But the right, limited mix of retail and residential could generate the much-needed income for the park.

 

Shoot, I've been to elevated, boardwalk retail plazas in the outer banks that would cover the same footprint as the current bath house (ick) and Honey Hut. There would still be room for a nice, Metroparks quality nature center.

 

I also agree 100 percent with Gottaplan on his boardwalk concept. Add a retail component and there is another unique-to-Cleveland magnet for commerce and growth. It's worth exploring how a series of boardwalks can better connect us to the lake/river. It's really an idea whose time has come.

This is a great topic of discussion -- for the Edgewater Park thread.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

 

I disagree.  The last thing Cleveland needs is another "pocket" of development that is unconnected to any other growing areas of the city.  The Shoreway conversion is a great opportunity to FINALLY have connection in Cleveland.  For too long there have been these small pockets of development for urban pioneers (Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit Shoreway, etc) that never fully grow to their potential and connect to the others.  I see this as an investment in connection of already existing neighborhoods that will only lead to drawing more people into the city.  People that would have been previously frightened of those "nether regions" in between currently existing pockets of new and revitalized housing.    Imagine Ohio City finally connected to Detroit Shoreway connected to Clifton/Edgewater.  Game changing.  No marina can offer that.

 

I wouldn't say "finally" connected, the Detroit Shoreway has always been connected to Edgewater/Clifton via Lake and Detroit Avenues west of Gordon Square. These areas have yet to be revitalized and continue to crumble into one of the most crime ridden neighborhoods on Cleveland's west side. A Shoreway conversion project bypasses the organic and historic connection of these neighborhoods in favor of a development free boulevard. The only way that DS can be physically connected is through a boulevard full of development, or the revitalization of Lake Avenue between Detroit and Clifton. Adding a median and putting in more pedestrian paths (as has been noted, a bike/pedestrian path already parallels the Shoreway right now from W 65th to West Blvd, with the Battery Park connection almost complete), without putting in at grade intersections puts off the "full west shoreway" dream for decades. The ODOT plan now sucks, and if people just accept it and let it go through, good luck ever getting a true lake connection in the near future. In terms of neighborhood cohesion, there needs to be at least a few physical structures to actually connect the neighborhoods along this route, I just don't see how a median accomplishes it.

 

 

^ That plan deals mostly in shrubberies... not much detail regarding the roadway itself.  Though "traffic calming" is mentioned, as well as somehow "mitigating" the highway, it looks like it would still be a highway.

 

The question is, what do we actually gain in terms of lakefront development from a boulevard conversion that offers no development along its path? I think the City would be better off leaving the shoreway as is, filling in the part of the lake just to the north of marina with mixed use development and putting in a mile long boardwalk from the beach to the edge of the marina. But, that's another topic.

Me too.  Well put.

 

I get that alot of people on this board & elsewhere feel like the Shoreway project doesn't go far enough to create lakefront development but if it remains a concrete divided highway, that development will NEVER happen.  This project needs to go forward so that sometime down the line, the basics are there to allow development along a 35mph boulevard....

 

 

 

Yes, that's my sentiment. I think the ODOT plan now is terrible. It's sort of a gamble, do you go ahead with this plan now and then hope that 20 years down the road you can improve upon it. Or do you hold out 5-8 years and hope that times change and the original concept can go forth? It's probably best just to go ahead and do something now, even if it means prolonging the desired results decades into the future.

I think if this latest plan is mothballed, it's going to be a wet blanket on any further development in the area.  Alot of the progress has been contingent on this latest version of the plan moving forward according to schedules outlined and updated for several years now.

 

Reminder, community meeting is tomorrow night, Thursday, 6-8pm, December 1st at Franklin Circle Community Church, located at 1688 Fulton Rd. in Cleveland regarding the possible funding cuts to the West Shoreway project by ODOT.  City of Cleveland Planning Director Robert Brown will be joined by Councilman Matt Zone, Councilman Joe Cimperman, and Councilman Jay Westbrook to receive input from the community regarding this project.

 

 

 

Are any UO's planning on attending this?  I am out-of-town for work and won't be able to attend.

I'll be there

Are any UO's planning on attending this?  I am out-of-town for work and won't be able to attend.

 

The bike community is a little irritated by the removal of planned bicycle infrastructure, and will be out in full force:

https://www.facebook.com/events/189460277804769/

More from Bike Cleveland, the new nonprofit cycling advocacy organization.

---

 

West Shoreway Public Meeting

 

We are writing to encourage you to attend a very important public meeting for Cleveland's bike community that is taking place Thursday, December 1st from 6-8pm at Franklin Circle Christian Church.

 

Bicycle and pedestrian connections to Cleveland’s lakefront are in jeopardy. The City of Cleveland and the Ohio Department of Transportation are discussing ways to cut costs on the West Shoreway project, and the multi-purpose trail along the lakefront is in danger of being cut from current funding.

Bike Cleveland is encouraging you to attend to hear about the changes and to tell the decision makers to keep their promise and invest in biking and walking on the West Shoreway.

 

The expectation of Bike Cleveland is that the West Shoreway plan will make active modes a priority as they were in the initial Lakefront Plan from 2004. The plan should incorporate dedicated bike and pedestrian infrastructure in the initial, funded round of construction. Project aims related to auto infrastructure take a secondary position to that original priority. For more on Bike Cleveland's position regarding the West Shoreway read our op-ed submitted to the Plain Dealer.

 

We need all cyclists and supporters of cycling to attend this crucial public meeting:

 

WEST SHOREWAY PUBLIC MEETING

Thursday, December 1st from 6pm-8pm

Franklin Circle Christian Church

1688 Fulton Avenue

Cleveland, OH 44113

 

Let us know you are coming to the meeting and tell your friends on Facebook. There will also be a group riding to the meeting from Joy Machines Bike Shop at 5:45pm.

 

We are also asking supporters of including multipurpose trails in the funded portion of the West Shoreway to sign our petition.

 

We hope to see you tomorrow night at the public meeting. Lets show the city that we support bicycle and pedestrian investments!

The mayor is also promoting this meeting......

 

http://portal.cleveland-oh.gov/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=11263

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

November 30, 2011

News Advisory

West Shoreway Community Meeting

 

CLEVELAND – On Thursday, December 1, 2011 at 6:00 pm the City of Cleveland, its Planning Commission and City Council Members Joe Cimperman, Matt Zone and Jay Westbrook will host a community meeting regarding the West Shoreway project at Franklin Circle Christian Church. There will be an update on the project, as well as an open dialog on issues and concerns.

 

WHO: Jay Westbrook, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 16

Joe Cimperman, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 3

Matt Zone, Cleveland City Councilman, Ward 15

Chris Warren, Chief of Regional Development, Office of the Mayor

Robert Brown, Director, City Planning Commission

 

WHAT: Community Meeting to discuss West Shoreway project

 

WHEN: Thursday, December 1, 2011

6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

 

WHERE: Franklin Circle Christian Church

1688 Fulton Road

Cleveland

 

- 30 -

Bike Cleveland has started a petition to present to the city and state that states that bike infrastructure should be included in Phase I of the project.  If you'd like to sign, please visit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDRLcEo2RlpnbmxVaVNKbnJHS2tqTkE6MQ.

Well, there's always the courts......

 

Environmental groups sue San Diego Association of Governments over $214B Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities plan; first regional plan under SB 375

28 November 2011

 

The Cleveland National Forest Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in the San Diego Superior Court against the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), challenging SANDAG’s $214-billion 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS). According to the groups, SANDAG used a deficient process to develop a plan that will over-invests in freeways at the expense of public transit, increased pollution and exacerbated global climate change.

 

The San Diego region is the first in California to produce a regional transportation plan with an SCS as required by SB 375, a new state law intended to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through compact land-use and transportation planning. (Earlier post.) SANDAG approved the plan on 28 Oct after two years of work.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/11/sandag-20111128.html

How did the meeting go?

Not good.  Pretty much all bad news.  Where do I start...  Nobody from ODOT was there.  The TRAC funding scoresheet was reviewed and it's unfathomable the project didn't score higher.  The renovation of the 76th tunnel that was started in 2010 is still on hold due to issues with the RR slope stabilization.  The costs for the interchange at 73rd are getting higher by the day and that's becoming unlikely.  The work at the 25th/28th intersection, probably the most needed aspect of the project from a safety standpoint, is so far out, it shouldn't even be considered a reality in my opinion.  The actual boulevard conversion is a pipe dream at this point.  That's just my take though, anyone else who was there, feel free to share your take

^ That doesnt sound good.

wow, no one from ODOT was there??

I suggest pursuing other sources of funding: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/12/china_wants_to_invest_in_us_ro.html

Was Mayor Jackson there? 

 

Did the council members show? 

 

What did they have to say about all this?