A lot of the developments in the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood went in with the assumption that the boulevard would be constructed.  For instance, I know that Stone Mad set up shop on W. 65th because that would be one of the connector streets to the boulevard. 

I don't think I've ever heard of such an effort in Cleveland to influence state officials regarding a transportation project. I think the last time I remember something like this was the fight over building the Clark Freeway through the Shaker Lakes.....

 

http://tinyurl.com/7gvpsqb

 

Mayor Frank Jackson Will Send Off West Shoreway Advocates Traveling by Bus to Columbus for ODOT TRAC Hearing

 

Representatives from Cleveland City Hall, Neighborhood Progress, Inc.,

Bike Cleveland and City Neighborhoods will Depart at

7:00am Thursday December 15, 2011

 

CLEVELAND, OHIO -  Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson will be in attendance on Thursday morning to send off advocates of the Lakefront West Plan as they begin their journey to the state capital. The group making the trip is a broad coalition from the City of Clevleand, Bike Cleveland, three west side neighborhood community development organizations, and Neighborhood Progress, Inc. (NPI). Over 50 riders have reserved seats. They will be traveling to Columbus to show their support to the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and to encourage them to fund Phase II of the Lakefront West Project. Advocates will travel by bus and bicycle caravan to attend a hearing of the Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) at the ODOT Central Office (1980 W. Broad Street, Columbus OH 43233). 

 

The second phase of the Lakefront West Plan includes improvements to the West Shoreway which currently exists as a barrier to Cleveland's prized asset, Lake Erie. Plans to reduce traffic to 35 miles per hour and create connections for pedestrians and cyclists have already prompted over $400 million in completed or planned economic development in the adjacent neighborhoods of Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway. Many future plans for development hinge on the completion of the Lakefront West Plan and ODOT's failure to fund the next phases will have a significant impact on the future of these Cleveland neighborhoods. "Neighborhood connections to our lakefront, traffic calming and new dedicated bikeways are critical to creating a new future for our city," says Bobbi Reichtell, Senior Vice President for Programs at Neighborhood Progress, Inc.

 

NPI is joining with Bike Cleveland, The City of Cleveland and local community development organizations- Ohio City, Inc., Detroit Shoreway Community Development Organization and Cudell Improvement-  in support of this advocacy campaign.  Buses will depart from the Gordon Square Arts District parking lot at W. 61st and Detroit at 7:00 am on Thursday December 15. Attendees, media representatives and supporters are asked to gather at 6:30am.

 

Though public comment is not allowed at TRAC hearings, the event will provide advocates with opportunities to interact with top city and state officials. State Senator Michael Skindell has agreed to meet with the group to hear their concerns. Ward 15 Councilman Matt Zone and Ward 16 Councilman Jay Westbrook will be in attendance. Several other City Hall staffers will be travelling by bus to the TRAC hearing including Chris Warren, Chief of Regional Development and Robert Brown, Director of Planning for the City of Cleveland.

 

# # #

I support this project 100% but can't believe that Cleveland leaders haven't done a better job stacking the deck on that TRAC board to get the funding pushed through...  there is nobody from the Cleveland area on it.  No wonder they didn't score the project highly...

What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.  As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.  I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.

^The area around the entrance and exit ramps

I support this project 100% but can't believe that Cleveland leaders haven't done a better job stacking the deck on that TRAC board to get the funding pushed through...  there is nobody from the Cleveland area on it.  No wonder they didn't score the project highly...

 

Robert Clarke Brown, Treasurer for Case Western Reserve University, is on the TRAC board.

 

 

What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.

 

The flat land between the railroad, the Edgewater access ramps and the Shoreway curve (often called the Westinghouse Curve) has development proposed for it in the city's lakefront master plans which is what this highway project grew out of.

 

As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.

 

What is an "expedient" road? If you mean a free-flowing, grade-separated road, Lakeshore Boulevard has seven at-grade intersections, six of them with stop lights. I lost count how many grade-separated pedestrian/bike crossings there were. More bike/ped crossings are probably the next-best option if we can't get an at-grade boulevard built here.

 

I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.

 

You cannot use federal transportation dollars to pay for new office towers, apartment buildings etc. and you can't use state gas tax dollars for anything other than highways. I think we've been over this before a few times. And what part of using public investments in transportation to cause spin-off private investment have you not heard of before?

Lake Shore Drive varies between 35 and 45 MPH, and in the winter much of it maxes out at 40 MPH.

And Lake Shore Drive near Grant Park has traffic lights and intersections

Cleveland backers of West Shoreway boulevard plan head to Columbus (video)

Published: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 10:25 AM    Updated: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 11:32 AM

Plain Dealer staff By Plain Dealer staff

 

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A contingent of Clevelanders boarded buses before dawn today to travel to Columbus in the hopes of convincing the Ohio Department of Transportation that plans to convert the West Shoreway to a boulevard should go forward.

 

City leaders circulated petitions and organized the trip after ODOT staffers indicated it would be unlikely that the agency would free up the $28.2 million needed for the second phase of the project.

 

The group was headed to a mid-morning meeting of an advisory body to ODOT that will issue a draft list of highway projects, by phases, to receive a chunk of $100 million over the next four years. The list will be finalized in March.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/backers_of_west_shoreway_boule.html

City officials vow to press on with shoreway project despite ODOT obstructionism

Thursday, December 08, 2011

 

When Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) officials recently asked business leaders from across the state to rank their region's planned infrastructure projects by importance, the Greater Cleveland Partnership ranked the West Shoreway project as the number one priority for Northeast Ohio.

 

For City of Cleveland Planning Director Bob Brown, that's one more reason why ODOT's numbers don't add up. The state agency gave the city 0 out of 10 points in the "economic development" category on its recent application for $28 million in additional funding to complete Phase II of the project.

 

"States all across the country are beginning to think differently, and they're realizing that projects like this can actually improve their economic competitiveness," Brown said at a recent community meeting to discuss the project. The 10-year-old plan would transform the underutilized, 50s-style freeway into a landscaped boulevard with bicycle and pedestrian pathways. It would also offer residents and visitors improved access to Lake Erie.

 

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/devnews/westshorewayproject120811.aspx

What additional land would be opened by slowing down the road that isn't currently open?  It's been noted that the shoreway is fronted by undevelopable land on one side (park, industry, sewage plant) and a steep grade on the other.  Returns would be severely tempered by these obstacles, even if every bullet point on the shoreway wish list were realized.  As for nothing ever developing along an expedient lakefront road, Chicago has done a better than average job of it.  I say put the money into actual development if that's the end goal.  This is the most roundabout way of building buildings I've ever heard of.

 

Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?  I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.

Frank Jackson is earning my respect more and more.

 

It's obvious to everyone on this board that ODOT's methods are outdated and unsuited for urban development.

 

The more we can get average people to understand this issue, the better.

Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?  I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.

 

There are no West Shoreway-specific plans that involve building buildings. But the city's lakefront plans showed that new buildings (mostly lakefront housing) could be spurred by slowing down the Shoreway traffic and making it less of a physical barrier to Edgewater Park.

Wherever did you get the idea that this is about building buildings along the boulevard?  I have yet to see any plans that encourage that.  There are, however, many buildings in the west 70s and 80's that would be ripe for redevelopment as residential, commericial and office spaces.  This project will keep the progress going.

 

There are no West Shoreway-specific plans that involve building buildings. But the city's lakefront plans showed that new buildings (mostly lakefront housing) could be spurred by slowing down the Shoreway traffic and making it less of a physical barrier to Edgewater Park.

 

Right--spinoff development as a part of the master plan.  But nothing directly connected to the boulevard itself.

 

I don't think you would find a person on this forum who does not want to see that kind development happen--but nothing is going to happen unless this project comes to fruition. 

 

Right--spinoff development as a part of the master plan.  But nothing directly connected to the boulevard itself.

 

Yes. Right. Correct-a-mundo! :)

 

Frank Jackson is earning my respect more and more.

 

It's obvious to everyone on this board that ODOT's methods are outdated and unsuited for urban development.

 

The more we can get average people to understand this issue, the better.

 

Trying to get the purveyors of pavement at ODOT to understand what the leaders of Ohio's urban areas are trying to do is like instigating a culture clash along the lines of Green Acres fame....

 

What could be done in the West Shoreway Conversion project to make Whiskey Island and Wendy Park more accessable?  As it is, one must drive the shoreway to the Edgewater Park exit, then creep along a twisting two lane road following an unattractive fence next to the railroad tracks.  That means that motoring is the *only* way in, unless you land on the catamaran beach.

There is a plan to use freed up land for developments.  Pictures are in this article from gcbl

 

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/citizens-guide-removing-highway

Tom Patton is such a dick. Of course he comes across few constituents who favor the project. When do healthy, active urban cyclists ever have an occasion to encounter a suburban Jabba The Hut like him? And if I was Bob Bennett, I'd smack Patton with a bear claw to get his attention. Extra sweet.

 

Cleveland officials are encouraged about future of West Shoreway project after meeting with ODOT officials

Published: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 5:00 PM    Updated: Thursday, December 15, 2011, 5:08 PM

  By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A concerted, grass roots push to land more money for the West Shoreway project has clearly caught the ear of state transportation officials.

 

Whether that means the city will land some or all of the $28.2 million it seeks to convert the 55 mph shoreway to a 35 mph boulevard remains to be seen.

 

But Jerry Wray, director of the Ohio Department of Transporation,  told a busload of city officials, residents and bicycling advocates who traveled to Columbus Thursday that they should keep their voices raised.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/12/cleveland_officials_are_encour.html

I used to see Bennet's sailboat at Edgewater Yacht Club.  He may have only been visiting.  He probably docks at a silver service club like Cleveland Yacht Club:

 

Robert Bennett, former chairman of the state Republican party, said he's talked with Wray. He lives on Edgewater Drive in Cleveland and supports the project. "I think there's a willingness on the part of the governor and (ODOT) director to attempt to bring it to a conclusion."

I actually had an hour long phone conversation with Sen Patton about the Shoreway project last year.  He said he'd support it if mayors of his district wrote letters of support for it.  He said he grew up in the West side neighborhood near the Shoreway and knows how important it is, but also said Cleveland hasn't done a good job of getting the project accomplished.  Only now it seems they are rallying support and getting on the same page.  Last year Frank Jackson barely supported the project and couldn't be bothered to call state leaders when a vote was in the state house to lower the speed limit, the first step to the boulevard conversion.

 

Also, I think Robert Clark Brown was removed from the TRAC board for not attending meetings.  He's not listed on the website here either.  http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Pages/Meet%20theTRAC.aspx  Sure hope they get him replaced with someone from the Cleveland area. 

More bike/ped crossings are probably the next-best option if we can't get an at-grade boulevard built here.

***

You cannot use federal transportation dollars to pay for new office towers, apartment buildings etc. and you can't use state gas tax dollars for anything other than highways. I think we've been over this before a few times. And what part of using public investments in transportation to cause spin-off private investment have you not heard of before?

 

Pedestrian and bike bridges do seem like a way to help those constituencies, without taking anything from those who prefer the roadway remain as it is.  The continued dismissal of that point of view has been noted by many people, people whose support may one day be needed. 

 

As to the money, yes, we both know that.  So spend the transport money on improving transport, while using other monies to stimulate development more directly.  I don't get how suddenly the boulevard conversion was never intended to stimulate nearby development.  Up till now that's been one of the main points of it.  If it's only about "access" to the lake... you've got to be kidding me.  That does not require disregarding thousands of commuters, an aspect of this which increasingly comes off as gratuitous and spiteful.  That takes us back to where we started, with less intrusive alternatives like bridges providing "access" equal to or better than at-grade crosswalks. 

I don't get how suddenly the boulevard conversion was never intended to stimulate nearby development.  Up till now that's been one of the main points of it.  If it's only about "access" to the lake... you've got to be kidding me. 

 

OK, how are you coming to that conclusion? Perhaps a good reason for the dismissal of commuters' arguments like yours is because come from far left field.

 

And it's not dismissal of the commuters' argument. If possession is 9/10 of the law, I'd say the people who live in Cleveland and want better access to a lakefront park in their neighborhood have a stronger position to argue than those who merely pass through their neighborhood on the way to work.

327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

 

Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

 

If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...

327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

 

Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.

 

 

Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.

I know it's not scientific, but...

 

Random Google Street View of Shoreway:

 

http://g.co/maps/6hm9h

 

Random Goolge Street View of Lake Shore Drive:

 

http://g.co/maps/ac763

327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

 

Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.

 

 

Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.

 

You are correct, Lake Shore Drive has much more traffic at off-peak hours than the West Shoreway.

What could be done in the West Shoreway Conversion project to make Whiskey Island and Wendy Park more accessable?  As it is, one must drive the shoreway to the Edgewater Park exit, then creep along a twisting two lane road following an unattractive fence next to the railroad tracks.  That means that motoring is the *only* way in, unless you land on the catamaran beach.

 

There are plans unrelated to this project for a pedestrian bridge in the west bank of the Flats to connect directly to Whiskey Island.  People jog and bike that two-lane road quite a bit to get to and from, but it's true that you have to access it from Edgewater.  It ain't an actual island but it is about as isolated as it could be, but that's as much about about both river and rail than it is about the Shoreway.

All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

 

If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...

 

Montrose Harbor, Belmont Harbor, North Avenue Beach -- I don't see any functional difference between those areas and Edgewater.

 

 

327, you're right on target here, and there are thousands of people who feel and think the same way you do but have kept their mouths shut.

 

Access to Edgewater Park = pedestrian bridges. Problem solved. I've said this from day one. Pedestrian bridges like the ones they have over -- to use a totally random example, of course -- Lake Shore Drive in Chicago.

 

 

Serious question, is Lakefront Drive vacant 90 percent of the time like the Shoreway is? Every time I've been to Chicago that stretch of road has tons of 24/7 traffic. The current existence of the Shoreway, by comparison, does not appear to have the same level of necessity.

 

Dead on surfohio!

 

This is about the future of OUR lakefront, not what the Shoreway was 40 years ago.  As someone previously stated the daily use totals are down to 30,000 vehicles.  This short stretch of highway needs to be updated for the next 50 years of Cleveland's existence.  That status quo that benefits 30,000 people from Rocky River and Lakewood to save 5 minutes on their commute will not really make much of difference in their lives.  Are all 30,000 of them going to move somewhere else?  And if they chose to do so, where are they going to move?  Further out that requires them to use I90?  Where is the logic in that?

Even if the Shoreway was not touched, I-90 is likely to become the better commute pattern into downtown with the new innerbelt bridge since it should alleviate alot of the backup occurring at the 71 merge/490 split.  I'd venture the traffic counts on the Shoreway will drop even more.

I know it's not scientific, but...

 

Random Google Street View of Shoreway:

 

http://g.co/maps/6hm9h

 

 

 

Random Goolge Street View of Lake Shore Drive:

 

http://g.co/maps/ac763

 

If you turn the Lakeshore drive pic 180 degrees backwards you see......A traffic light and an intersection

That's the first traffic light when you're heading southbound (the northernmost light), so it has no bearing on the southbound traffic volume at that point yet although the northbound traffic (direction the Google vehicle is moving would be affected).  If you move the Street View through those few intersections, you see that none of them causes these catastrophic backups people are fearing, even when the controlled access portions have far more traffic than the Shoreway.

Are all 30,000 of them going to move somewhere else?  And if they chose to do so, where are they going to move?  Further out that requires them to use I90?  Where is the logic in that?

 

Never doubt the level of irrational thinking some suburbanites are capable of.

 

I know many people that would rather commute 30 minutes on a freeway than 15 minutes on a road with traffic lights.  I don't understand it.

This is far from any intersection.

 

http://g.co/maps/zzfqz

All the comparisons to Lake Shore Drive in Chicago are great except the lake shore along Chicago doesn't have the equivalent of a huge park akin to Edgewater.  Much of the lakeshore in the heart of Chicago is a narrow strip of beach with a bike/hike walking path.  Not the extent of ball fields, picnic areas or massive beach that we have at Edgewater.  In warmer months there is some type of large gathering almost every weekend at Edgewater with tents, etc. 

 

If all we were trying to access was a little strip of beach and some bike/hike path like Chicago has, I think pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway would suffice, but that's just not the case...

 

Montrose Harbor, Belmont Harbor, North Avenue Beach -- I don't see any functional difference between those areas and Edgewater.

 

Montrose area has 6 pedestrian connections to an area that is significantly smaller than Edgewater which has 4: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake (closed), 76th (closed) and 65th.  Belmont & North Ave Beach combined aren't even a sliver of Edgewater's area.  And they both have several access points for pedestrians.

 

Also worth noting that Lake Shore Drive is 4 lanes both directions and fronts some of the most expensive real estate in America.  A tunnel project would be nearly impossible here.  Cleveland's Shoreway is 3 lanes in each direction, carries a fraction of the traffic and fronts vacant obsolete warehouses...  but hey you said they're essentially the same so whatever

 

Edit: it's over 1.5 miles between the two entrances to Edgewater Park right now: West Blvd & 65th.  Keep the comparisons to Chicago coming, it only justifies the need for this project even more...

"The Campaign for a Free and Clear Lakefront is a grassroots coalition to remove Lakeshore Drive from Grant Park, and eventually the entire Chicago shoreline."

 

http://foreverfreeandclear.org/

 

Montrose area has 6 pedestrian connections to an area that is significantly smaller than Edgewater which has 4: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake (closed), 76th (closed) and 65th.  Belmont & North Ave Beach combined aren't even a sliver of Edgewater's area.  And they both have several access points for pedestrians.

 

Also worth noting that Lake Shore Drive is 4 lanes both directions and fronts some of the most expensive real estate in America.  A tunnel project would be nearly impossible here.  Cleveland's Shoreway is 3 lanes in each direction, carries a fraction of the traffic and fronts vacant obsolete warehouses...  but hey you said they're essentially the same so whatever

 

Edit: it's over 1.5 miles between the two entrances to Edgewater Park right now: West Blvd & 65th.  Keep the comparisons to Chicago coming, it only justifies the need for this project even more...

 

Why would a couple pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway not solve the problem of pedestrian access, whatever the size of the park?

Why would a couple pedestrian bridges over the Shoreway not solve the problem of pedestrian access, whatever the size of the park?

 

Why do shopping malls have more entrances than little stores?

You tell me -  where would you locate the pedestrian bridges?  Over the norfolk southern railroad tracks too?  or under the tracks, then over the shoreway?  The RR tracks are a bigger obstacle than the Shoreway...

 

I think the current design is perfectly adequate, with the following improvements

 

1. Reconfigured intersection at Lake & West Blvd - current setup is a beotch to get across on foot or bike

 

2. Upgraded tunnel at Lake/Clifton - in progress but not complete

 

3. Upgraded tunnel at 76th - in progress but not complete

 

4. New access point at 73rd for cars & pedestrians - will not interfere with Shoreway traffic but will tie into Edgewater on/off ramps

 

5.  Refigured intersection at 25th/28th is a main priority from a safety standpoint but has nothing to do with park access.

 

Slowing the Shoreway down is essential to adding the bike path.  I think this point is getting lost in the discussion.  If the traffic isn't slowed, you'd need a retaining wall or something to protect pedestrians on the nearby path or move it significantly far off the route which adds cost.  Slowing the Shoreway down to 35 allows the path to be located closer by the roadway and saves money.  See the cross sections on the ODOT plan for how this would work.

 

If the Shoreway isn't slowed down, the bike path is a non-issue.  Access points which I mentioned above are unrelated to traffic speed.

You guys might be changing my mind a bit. I'm going to read more on the plan. Have a good Friday.

You guys might be changing my mind a bit. I'm going to read more on the plan. Have a good Friday.

 

Come along and help us make this happen! :)

One thing not being considered in these comparisons is that Cleveland's densest housing area is 5 miles west of center, and Lakewood is more dense overall than anything between it and downtown, including Battery Park.  Why things ended up like that I'll never know.  But that's why there are 2 highways for the west shore, and that's why the shoreway's traffic is so concentrated into rush hour. 

 

Keep in mind that reduced shoreway traffic in recent decades coincided with reduced jobs and retail downtown, which is not the current trend or goal.  For those suggesting that 90 will absorb the shoreway's volume, consider that W117th already backs up from 90 to Madison at times.  Too much stoppage added for that 1-entrance Target complex. 

 

The people who oppose (only certain aspects of) this aren't doing so because they're against progress, and painting that picture is just not helpful at all.  The arguments against bridges here aren't particularly strong-- yes they should probably span the tracks too, and no there doesn't need to be one for every block-- so I don't advise cutting off consideration of alternatives quite yet.  If there's a way for everyone to win, shouldn't that be the goal?

I don't think I-90 needs to absorb any traffic at all.  I think that the Shoreway can handle all of the traffic it currently does at rush hour with a 35 MPH speed limit and a few well-timed traffic lights.

More talk:

 

http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628

The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?  How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation? 

 

 

What would be more expensive (and potentially cost-prohibitive) - ped bridgers or tunnels?  Personally, I see about even advantages to both so I would go with the more economically feasible plan.

The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?  How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation?

 

The same way Ohio's largest cities have let state government (both parties) ignore all of the state's urban needs for 40+ years. What can Cleveland do about it? Withhold state tax revenues? Threaten to secede? Go to war?

The last couple paragraphs say the most.  How can we expect to have a fighting chance without a local representative on the board?  How does Cleveland let the Governor ignore the largest metro in the state when it comes to transportation?

 

The same way Ohio's largest cities have let state government (both parties) ignore all of the state's urban needs for 40+ years. What can Cleveland do about it? Withhold state tax revenues? Threaten to secede? Go to war?

 

 

The Sovereign Nation of Cuyahoga.  It has a ring to it.  Plus we can add four more casinos, along with cheap gas and smokes! ;) 

More talk:

 

http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/highway-robbery/Content?oid=2780628

 

I was interviewed for that article but my quotes didn't make it into print.  I know several others who were interviewed who's comments weren't included.  It's a shame too, I had high expectations when the author told me what she had planned for the article.  Instead it's not much of anything except restating what's been written in the PD.

 

In terms of tunnels or bridges, I didn't think the pedestrian bridge over the active railroad tracks was a good idea, but a quick google search shows alot of instances where it seems to.  Much less maintenance and probably safer than a tunnel too, except I hate the idea of having an elevator involved...

 

I don't see a need for any new intersections so long as the one at 73rd gets installed as planned.  That's 5 access points to Edgewater along 1.5 miles: West Blvd, Clifton/Lake tunnel, 76th tunnel, 73rd tunnel, & 65th tunnel.