With the innerbelt lane closures pretty much going into full swing over the past few days, it's no surprise that they delayed this project a few more years. I figured a lot of I-90 traffic would get funneled to the West Shoreway, but didn't expect the heavy volume I've been seeing the past few days. It feels like there are twice as many cars compared to the week before. Clifton and Lake Avenues were a parking lot at rush hour both today and yesterday. I'm not sure how much of a factor this was in delaying the project, but it would be a nightmare to have both of these arteries into downtown under construction at the same time.

it absolutely was a factor.  Along with funding.

Some updates on the tunnels

- Lake Avenue tunnel is pretty much done.  Just need to reinstall the lightpoles and finish the landscaping, come October, per ODOT guidelines.

- 76th tunnel has a long way to go.  Completion was extended to this year based on poor soil conditions which led to the driven sheet pile.  Still having issues with the soil nails and design of the retaining walls along the RR tracks.  Otherwise, work up top on 76th is wrapping up.  Pavers are installed.  Lights & landscaping in October.  Concrete walls will be coated.  Public art is in the planning phase.  Lower level connection at Edgewater is nearly complete.  Ramp is paved, bioswale pond is done with fencing, landscaping and painting still remain.

 

Big picture for the Shoreway - mainline reconstruction is still a ways off, 2015 I think.  Right in/right out at W. 54th is probably getting scrapped which will save money for the project and the local residents/businesses don't want it anyhow.  Bicycle lane in two directions may be located on north side of the westbound lane, with some type of buffer/median installed between that & vehicle traffic. 

It will be so nice to see all of those completed and will help future development. Currently it's so difficult getting to Edgewater from those neighborhoods.

  Otherwise, work up top on 76th is wrapping up. ....... Public art is in the planning phase.  Lower level connection at Edgewater is nearly complete. 

 

So I guess the guy with the can of spray paint wasn't part of the planning, then?

It will be so nice to see all of those completed and will help future development. Currently it's so difficult getting to Edgewater from those neighborhoods.

 

I think it's not enough to have any type of noticeable impact.

More bad news for the Shoreway project....  major cost overruns, questions about funding and the project gets whittled away more and more...

 

Cleveland officials propose cost cuts for West Shoreway project, slam ODOT for delays

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/08/cleveland_officials_propose_co.html

assuming ODOT gets it's proverbial $#!t together, how do you think this development will effect edgewater? Will it make the area more attractive or will it cut off access enough to make it less attractive? I'm hoping it makes the area more walkable. It's too bad they didn't go ahead with the Euclid Corridor bus treatments to Clifton.. thoughts? (is it obvious that I'm looking at a property over here?)

Would four intersections on the shoreway really be unacceptable for traffic? 

where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

 

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.

^I would love to see what assumptions were used in that model.  How much traffic in the real world would choose to travel down Detroit, Lorain or any parallel street to the new boulevard?  How many people would choose I-90?

 

ODOT has a history of finding excuses, rarely do they find solutions, especially if it requires innovation.

I don't believe those studies either.  ODOT isn't in the business of using less concrete.

so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

 

It's a moot point, the latest iteration doesn't include any intersections and they still don't have enough money...

so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

 

It's a moot point, the latest iteration doesn't include any intersections and they still don't have enough money...

i don't think ODOT has ever released the actual traffic studies or their assumptions, but has remained firm that it will degrade service to cars, and won't work. 

 

commuters and commute times are certainly an important element to consider, but i think a balance needs to exist.  does it make sense to (re)build a roadway to serve 10 hours of peak traffic per week (out of 168 hours in a week)?  in some cases it may, and maybe there are really 20 hours of peak traffic per week.  i can't help but think that this whole process is like designing the huge parking lots for a big box store that sit 3/4 empty most of the time, except for 2 or 3 big shopping days.

 

if this project isn't going to be significantly different than the current configuration, i'm not sure it makes sense to spend any money at all on it.

I don't like any of this news.

 

But for me, the "W73rd under the RR with connection to the Shoreway" is the most important piece for development.  This is the crucial part for Det-Shor and Gordon Square health and development.

 

Yes I want the lakefront access and the beautification and also would ideally want to see the originally proposed 4 intersection bouleveard, but I guess I'll have wait (perhaps a long long time) for that. :(

where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

 

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.

 

I'd like to see these studies.  Clifton doesn't back up and most of the traffic on the Shoreway comes straight off of Clifton (and some off Lake).  Also, I would bet that Carnegie and Chester each have as much traffic on the east side and aren't too bad at rush hour.

 

Sure, it may add a couple minutes.  But I think the benefits outweigh the slight cost of adding 2 minutes to someone's commute.

where exactly do you think these four intersections would be located?

 

And to answer your question, yes, they would be unacceptable.  Traffic modeling studies done several years ago showed backups occurring even during light traffic and major backups occurring during peak hours.

 

I'd like to see these studies.  Clifton doesn't back up and most of the traffic on the Shoreway comes straight off of Clifton (and some off Lake).  Also, I would bet that Carnegie and Chester each have as much traffic on the east side and aren't too bad at rush hour.

 

Sure, it may add a couple minutes.  But I think the benefits outweigh the slight cost of adding 2 minutes to someone's commute.

Very true and Clifton would have about the same amount of traffic lights proportionally.  I think if ODOT really wanted to consider all the options that could have played around with modeling with 2 or 3 intersections.  But they simply said no after they believed 4 intersections would not work.

Because ODOT doesn't like sidewalks :)

so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

 

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level.  Also, let's not forget that the majority of traffic on the Shoreway becomes traffic on Clifton, which doesn't have any substantial problems.  Why are at grade intersections OK to the west of Lake, but not to the East?

so trust of ODOT studies aside, you DON'T think there would be significant traffic backups if at grade intersections were part of the project?

 

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level.  Also, let's not forget that the majority of traffic on the Shoreway becomes traffic on Clifton, which doesn't have any substantial problems.  Why are at grade intersections OK to the west of Lake, but not to the East?

 

This is a big part of the argument against this that I don't understand.  If ODOT properly plans for and installs timed lights, etc, the effect on commuters on this last 2 miles would be minimal.  I really hope our leaders show some guts and fight ODOT for every penny on this project.  This project stands to help finally do what most urban developers in Cleveland have not been able to do:  tie multiple neighborhoods together at once and give them all a fighting chance.  Without it, Detroit Shoreway will remain isolated from Clifton/Baltic, Edgewater, etc.

This is a big part of the argument against this that I don't understand.  If ODOT properly plans for and installs timed lights, etc, the effect on commuters on this last 2 miles would be minimal. 

 

Minimal?  There are no intersections as currently planned and just the mere reduction in speed limit has West Side commuters up in arms.  Be careful about making assumptions as to what effects others would consider "minimal".

 

Traffic interruptions aside, it's now a cost issue.  There isn't enough money to reconfigure the 25th/28th intersection which was the most important from a safety standpoint, there certainly won't be enough to reconfigure any others.

 

No, I don't.  I think a lot of traffic would divert to alternate routes.  Traffic, like water, tends to find it's level. 

 

 

Sometimes. Often, however, reducing lane-miles (how roadway pavement is measured) results in a reduction of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT, how traffic is measured). Elsewhere in the nation, whenever a highway was proposed to be downgraded to an arterial or completely removed, motorists feared a "carmageddon." But just as more lane-miles cause the phenomenon of "induced demand" with people driving farther or more often, so does the inverse. People drive less, use transit, telecommute, take transit or drive on alternative routes if available, or relocate their work or housing when roadway capacity is reduced. But in the absence of those alternatives, the economy could similarly be downgraded.

 

Ultimately, this project reveals the importance of distinguishing between accessibility and mobility. ODOT's priority has long been mobility -- of vehicles (understandably, since more VMTs means more revenue for them to play with). The city's priority seems to be giving its citizens accessibility to goods and services (understandably, if they want to get re-elected). How this project emerges from this debate will signal an important direction for the future of other, similar decisions for this city (the Inner Belt being a cause lost to ODOT and the old way of viewing transportation investments -- moving more vehicles rather than what's in them).

 

This report discusses the importance of that distinction, and how a local or regional economy can actually be enhanced better over the longer-term by emphasizing accessibility over mobility....

 

http://www.vtpi.org/vmt_red.pdf

How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.

A problem with the side streets today was the number of trees and tree limbs down in Ohio City.

 

Franklin was closed near W 65, there were limbs and wires down on 65th, and even on Lorain (I went pretty far south to try to avoid the traffic problems) there were limbs down.

 

 

What has puzzled me most about this project is the need to remove a lane for a multi-purpose path, especially between West 65th and West Blvd. I walk on the multi purpose path that already exists just 20 yards north of the shoreway everyday. I just can't figure out why we'd need another a few feet away, and along a busy road no less! Why can't we just fix up the one we already have instead of building another right next to it?!? It just seems so silly to argue for more paths in an area that has plenty. Once the pedestrian tunnels are complete, this area will have great pedestrian accessibility.

 

This project has taken so many directions over the past few years. What is the ultimate goal that is wanted now?

 

How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.

 

Not really, no.  Nobody is even considering removing the Shoreway and replacing it with nothing without telling anyone in advance.

How ironic that the shoreway closed today for the storm. I've never seen traffic backups like that before. It's a good case study for a worst case scenario for traffic problems. The side streets into downtown cannot handle much excess shoreway flow.

 

Not really, no.  Nobody is even considering removing the Shoreway and replacing it with nothing without telling anyone in advance.

 

Unless he means that the worst case scenario is that the Shoreway will include intersections fitted with red lights that never turn green.

Or that usually are always green, but occasionally they're red all night. And nobody ever knows in advance.

Yes, this morning was a worst case scenario for alternate shoreway routes, sorry if that wasn't clear. As far as the extra time it takes for commuters to get home, well isn't that already a moot point now? You generally have to wait 3+ cycles at the shoreway exit and Lake now that that I-90 traffic uses it as a short cut, big deal, so it adds 5 minutes at rush hour. I just see this boulevard conversion as money better suited elsewhere in the city. Instead of building another pedestrian path next to existing paths, why not just make Edgewater Park a more pleasant place. Develop the lakeshore instead of a road kind of near it.

You can't use this money for anything other than for transportation. And if any state gas tax money is involved, it cannot be used for anything other than roads, as per the Ohio Constitution, Article XII Sec. 5a.

In terms of a roadway, there's nothing terribly wrong with it. Look at MLK on the east side ... that road is terribly beat up along with the pedestrian paths alongside it, but yet in Cleveland, let's put millions of dollars into infrastructure that is sound, but let crumbling roads crumble more? Seems wasteful to me.

 

I think in the end, with whatever is ultimately chosen, it's not going to be what anyone really wanted. You can convert it into a "boulevard" but in the eyes of cars and pedestrians who use it, it will always be a highway. A conversion to a boulevard doesn't just magically make it a boulevard. It will always lack the scale of development that makes a boulevard a boulevard. Many of our current highways have landscaped medians that the Shoreway currently lacks. These are by no means boulevards and adding a sidewalk and putting up a 35 mph sign would not make it so. Yet, many think the simple act of adding a pedestrian path and putting some landscaping will magically make this feel like a boulevard. As a resident, I know that regardless of what speed the traffic flows on this new construction, I do not want to walk alongside this highway boulevard. I love walking down Clifton because there are things to look at ... gorgeous homes of varying architecture, shops, and dining. What will this new boulevard have for me to look at? It's going to feel cold, isolated and disconnected from the lake. When I use the pedestrian paths  that go through the wooded section of Edgewater and then alongside the beach, I look up at the Shoreway and think, "Are people really fighting to put millions of dollars into that?" I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

^ If you've ever seen Lincoln Memorial Drive in Milwaukee, I think it could be a really great template for the Shoreway.

 

Believe me, it is far and away a much better experience than the Shoreway.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/#

 

The project was an outgrowth of the city's Lakefront Redevelopment Plan. The goal when this project was first conceived was to turn the Shoreway into a boulevard that was less of a barrier between the city and the lakefront, and along which development could grow. Details of that vision are still available here:

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html

 

Aw heck, I'll just post a portion of the graphic which shows the West Shoreway and what this project was originally intended to enable.......

 

^ If you've ever seen Lincoln Memorial Drive in Milwaukee, I think it could be a really great template for the Shoreway.

 

Believe me, it is far and away a much better experience than the Shoreway.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/14894149@N02/2582495715/#

 

 

I like how the path beside it is at a slightly lower elevation than the street level. I think this will need to be done for the Shoreway to at least get pedestrians to use it.

The project was an outgrowth of the city's Lakefront Redevelopment Plan. The goal when this project was first conceived was to turn the Shoreway into a boulevard that was less of a barrier between the city and the lakefront, and along which development could grow. Details of that vision are still available here:

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html

 

Aw heck, I'll just post a portion of the graphic which shows the West Shoreway and what this project was originally intended to enable.......

 

 

Does the current proposal even lend to the future possibility of development along the new boulevard? For example, in that graphic, it shows the potential for buildings on the south side of the Shoreway just before it curves inbound under the railroad tracks. I'm not sure who is in possession of this parcel or if it's city/state owned, but could driveways be put in even if the final conversion is intersection free?

 

 

Good question WestBLVD. Instead of being an additional barrier, new development can do a world of good to enhance connectivity if done the right way. 

 

It's not too hard to envision new buildings that could span the tracks by Edgewater. Or how something like the legendary North Coast Transportation Center could bridge the gulf between downtown and the lake.

 

I thought the genius of the Blvd. conversion would be to finally take into account the the untapped value of the land on each side of the road. Jersey barriers be damned.

I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

 

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

 

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.

 

I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

 

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

 

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.

 

 

Are you correct about the sales at Battery Park??  It's not fully built out as is being built in segments/phases.

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

 

Battery park is NOT lakefront property.

 

How do you get from battery park to the lake? 

 

The Market for real Estate has been distorted by the Economic situation.  just because it isn't selling now does not mean it will not sell when the economy improves. 

 

The Idea was to create valuable lakefront land that Cleveland Lacks adding residential addresses to the shoreway would have long-term benefits to the park and to the entire neighborhood.  As an urban park Edgewater is an embarrassment. why is there soo much parking, why isn't there a playground, why doesn't it have any activities there, like tennis, squash, or basketball, and why is the beach so Filthy? 

 

There is a lack of money needed to maintain and grow the park.  lets say We could add residential development to the boulevard, how hard would it be to propose a SID for battery park, Edgewater Neighborhood and any new development  on the boulevard, to fund the upkeep and improvements needed at Edgewater park.  It would be possible to use the revenue from the assessment to support the park.

 

I want to see proposals that actually make the Shoreway into a viable strip of new commercial and residential, without that, this project is a 100 million dollar waste of money.

 

We already have large tracts of new land available residential along the lake.  It's called Battery Park.  And after 5 years it's not even half sold.  I don't think creating new land for development is a real essential component of the project.

 

You're only thinking about the actual mainline conversion into a boulevard and missing the critical interchange at 73rd which is essential to Gordon Square and the surrounding community.  The interchange at 25th/28th is such a nightmare for vehicle & pedestrian traffic I can't believe it hasn't been redone already.  These are the essential portions of the project, not the actual boulevard construction.  The multi-use path you're dismissing would allow biking/jogging along the lake from downtown to Edgewater which currently doesn't exist - another key component of the plan, which as many have pointed out, exists in other cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, etc.

 

 

I'm fairly sure Battery Park is doing very well in terms of selling built units. It isn't entirely built, but what is built is mostly sold.

 

I agree completely about the exchange at 25th/28th. It SUCKS. Needs a total rework.

Latest version of West Shoreway project missing trails to the north; bicycling advocates unhappy

Published: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 6:00 PM    Updated: Friday, September 23, 2011, 7:25 AM

  By Tom Breckenridge, The Plain Dealer

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A key motive of efforts to turn the West Shoreway into a friendly boulevard are biking and walking -- plans called for trails to roll nearby the 2 1/2-mile route.

 

But large swaths of the trails are lost in the city's latest, pared-down version of the project. And bicycling advocates aren't happy.

 

"We saw it as major progress for cyclists to travel safely and easily," says Kevin Cronin of the nonprofit Cleveland Bikes. "It will be a lost opportunity if that goes away."

 

Frustrated City Hall officials have, for now, jettisoned most of the trails, as they grapple with skyrocketing costs.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/09/latest_version_of_west_shorewa.html

I vote to cancel.  It is so far removed from a project that would extend the city grid to the lake, that its just not worth it

Fully agree.

I agree also.  Let's spend more to reconstruct sound walls for ODOT.  That is an investment in Cleveland's future....

 

Put me in for a cancel vote, too.  This is a good example of how a great ideas are pared down to the point that it isn't worth pursuing them.

I agree also.  Let's spend more to reconstruct sound walls for ODOT.  That is an investment in Cleveland's future....

 

 

Cleburger, I was a big supporter of the original plan, then a mild supporter of the stripped down plan.  This plan, in my opinion, should be shelved until the funding for something closer to the original vision is secured.  If we go ahead now with a few cosmetic changes, we will lose an opportunity to dramatically improve a growing and prosperous section of the city for a generation.

so the loss of bike paths is the deal breaker for you who would no longer support?  You'd forego the 73rd interchange, the reconfigured 25th/28th interchange and all the other improvements that the stripped down plan still includes???

So the plan means the bike paths absolutely cannot be added later?

 

I'd really like those new interchanges, especially at 25th/28th.

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.