January 18, 20232 yr Is Ronayne advocating for making it a boulevard or removing it entirely? One of the reasons I prefer the boulevard approach is that it seems like a much more realistic lift politically.
January 18, 20232 yr 30 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: How many people use this freeway on a daily basis? A: Not enough to justify having it cut off downtown from the lake. I want to be clear that I’m not a “remove all highways” person. That said, I think the Shoreway is different than many other downtown highway. For one, it isn’t a through highway. The only place someone actually saves time by using it is trips originating or ending in northeastern Lakewood and Edgewater. And even for them, 90 isn’t that far out of the way. For this small target audience, we’re willing to completely cut off the western side of the city and downtown from the lake? It’s a BAD highway. How much would it cost to just remove it? A: That will have to be studied before it’s executed. But there will be many financial benefits, too. New land will be open for development and therefore collect property tax. The landbridge will be less expensive when it only has to go over railroad tracks instead of also clearing the highway. Milwaukee and Rochester have had very positive impacts from removing downtown stub highways. Where would the $$ come from? A: The infrastructure bill and IRA have money for highway removal. This is a great opportunity for Cleveland. Just a billion for the whole country, and even with the Democrats running everything that got chopped hard.
January 18, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said: Not sure about funneling more vehicles onto i-271 and I-480. They are traffic nightmares already. Some actually want that. This should be kept in mind.
January 18, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said: Not sure about funneling more vehicles onto i-271 and I-480. They are traffic nightmares already. 😂 as someone who travels for a living, I find this extremely funny. Try the 405 on a Friday afternoon. 480 and 271 might as well be country lanes....
January 18, 20232 yr 11 minutes ago, Cleburger said: 😂 as someone who travels for a living, I find this extremely funny. Try the 405 on a Friday afternoon. 480 and 271 might as well be country lanes.... 271 is nowhere near the mess it was before the 480 interchange approach was expanded. Southbound, backups to Chagrin were not unusual.
January 18, 20232 yr Just now, E Rocc said: 271 is nowhere near the mess it was before the 480 interchange approach was expanded. Southbound, backups to Chagrin were not unusual. You do realize just building more lanes and therefore creating induced demand isn’t the solve here. If it was Los Angeles and Houston/DFW wouldn’t have traffic issues. As noted above other cities have done similar exercises with great results. This isn’t rocket science, but auto centric American culture will try to tell you otherwise.
January 18, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, Clefan14 said: You do realize just building more lanes and therefore creating induced demand isn’t the solve here. If it was Los Angeles and Houston/DFW wouldn’t have traffic issues. As noted above other cities have done similar exercises with great results. This isn’t rocket science, but auto centric American culture will try to tell you otherwise. In this case it worked pretty well. The original design was poor, dumping both the local and express lanes into two lanes under the bridge, then bringing in the traffic off 480W.
January 18, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, E Rocc said: 271 is nowhere near the mess it was before the 480 interchange approach was expanded. Southbound, backups to Chagrin were not unusual. I remember that interchange very differently. And when I lived near Geauga Lake 1978-93, we drove I-271 South to 422 West often. It was usually backed up with traffic in the afternoons, sometimes all the way to Chagrin. Anyhoo... Did everyone notice Chris Ronayne's tweet from today? "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
January 18, 20232 yr The addition of the third southbound lane under the US422/I271 to I480N bridges, and the addition of a lane eastbound on I480 EB west of I480N has dramatically improved traffic flows on I271 southbound and I480 eastbound, by removing bottlenecks.
January 18, 20232 yr 6 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Great to see Ronayne beating this drum. Remove the Shoreway between the Main Ave bridge and the innerbelt. Build the land bridge over the rail at a lower cost because of no highway to clear, and reconnect downtown to the lakefront. 24 minutes ago, KJP said: … Anyhoo... Did everyone notice Chris Ronayne's tweet from today? Yep. It’s what started this whole conversation. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
January 18, 20232 yr Might as well remove the Main Ave bridge too. It isn't going to last much longer.
January 18, 20232 yr 40 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said: Might as well remove the Main Ave bridge too. It isn't going to last much longer. I'll bring beer and my sledgehammer! Edited January 18, 20232 yr by Clefan98
January 19, 20232 yr 16 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said: Might as well remove the Main Ave bridge too. It isn't going to last much longer. I've heard that replacing it is the next big project, after the 480 bridge is done. Some here seem to advocate making it more difficult to get around this area by private car. Even if that were politically feasible (it isn't), it would lead to economic decline and the area being a less attractive place to locate for most people and institutions.
January 19, 20232 yr 6 minutes ago, E Rocc said: I've heard that replacing it is the next big project, after the 480 bridge is done. Some here seem to advocate making it more difficult to get around this area by private car. Even if that were politically feasible (it isn't), it would lead to economic decline and the area being a less attractive place to locate for most people and institutions. This is exactly the opposite of the results that other cities who have removed low-value highways have experienced. Car-centric policies in general are bad for cities and live-ability, but bad highways are particularly egregious in their negative impact. If that highway wasn’t dividing downtown from the lake, I would have much less of a problem with it. We need to keep in mind how much potential there is for improving the city by removing it. If getting around by car easily was important for the local economy, Cleveland would be rich and NYC would be poor. I do think that even with removing the Shoreway, the Main Avenue bridge should be kept. It would be preferable to turn it into a multi-modal bridge (cars and protected bike lanes). A high level bridge over the river is valuable. I’ve seen many people on here speculating that the bridge is near end-of-life, but it always seems like these are just guesses. I’d be interested in seeing whatever ODOT or engineering reports there are about this bridge. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
January 19, 20232 yr 6 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: This is exactly the opposite of the results that other cities who have removed low-value highways have experienced. Car-centric policies in general are bad for cities and live-ability, but bad highways are particularly egregious in their negative impact. If that highway wasn’t dividing downtown from the lake, I would have much less of a problem with it. We need to keep in mind how much potential there is for improving the city by removing it. If getting around by car easily was important for the local economy, Cleveland would be rich and NYC would be poor. I do think that even with removing the Shoreway, the Main Avenue bridge should be kept. It would be preferable to turn it into a multi-modal bridge (cars and protected bike lanes). A high level bridge over the river is valuable. I’ve seen many people on here speculating that the bridge is near end-of-life, but it always seems like these are just guesses. I’d be interested in seeing whatever ODOT or engineering reports there are about this bridge. Right on, we need to bring back walkable areas to the city, not make it more convenient for suburbanites to cross through.
January 19, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: This is exactly the opposite of the results that other cities who have removed low-value highways have experienced. Car-centric policies in general are bad for cities and live-ability, but bad highways are particularly egregious in their negative impact. If that highway wasn’t dividing downtown from the lake, I would have much less of a problem with it. We need to keep in mind how much potential there is for improving the city by removing it. If getting around by car easily was important for the local economy, Cleveland would be rich and NYC would be poor. I do think that even with removing the Shoreway, the Main Avenue bridge should be kept. It would be preferable to turn it into a multi-modal bridge (cars and protected bike lanes). A high level bridge over the river is valuable. I’ve seen many people on here speculating that the bridge is near end-of-life, but it always seems like these are just guesses. I’d be interested in seeing whatever ODOT or engineering reports there are about this bridge. The FHA called it "fracture critical" in 2013, I am not sure if this was before or after the work was done on it that year. This designation had as much to do with the design as the condition. Remember it was a WPA project, focused as much on keeping people working as building up infrastructure. (I am one conservative that will *not* criticize the WPA, it taught people skills that were essential during WWII and the postwar era).
January 19, 20232 yr 28 minutes ago, E Rocc said: I've heard that replacing it is the next big project, after the 480 bridge is done. Some here seem to advocate making it more difficult to get around this area by private car. Even if that were politically feasible (it isn't), it would lead to economic decline and the area being a less attractive place to locate for most people and institutions. The highways that are under discussion for removal or a road-diets are not about getting around Cleveland, but passing through Cleveland. That does the City no good, and high cost of maintaining all of this infrastructure as the tax base is continually spread thinner and thinner is an economic drag on the region.
January 19, 20232 yr 6 minutes ago, Clefan98 said: Right on, we need to bring back walkable areas to the city, not make it more convenient for suburbanites to cross through. They aren't mutually exclusive, you know. The perception is that some planners have a desire to inconvenience people on purpose to push them towards living the way the former wish them to, that can only lead to backlash, in the long run.
January 19, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, Luke_S said: The highways that are under discussion for removal or a road-diets are not about getting around Cleveland, but passing through Cleveland. That does the City no good, and high cost of maintaining all of this infrastructure as the tax base is continually spread thinner and thinner is an economic drag on the region. The county is 2/3 suburban, let alone the metro area and double let alone the state. Ohioans are big on finding a way around what the politicians think they should do. Road removal and diets are negative change. Urbanists in this area, and for that matter most non-coastal areas, should focus on the positive. Otherwise you poison your cause. Edited January 19, 20232 yr by E Rocc Horribly run on sentence.
January 19, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, E Rocc said: They aren't mutually exclusive, you know. The perception is that some planners have a desire to inconvenience people on purpose to push them towards living the way the former wish them to, that can only lead to backlash, in the long run. Why should people living in cities be forced to deal with noise and air pollution from cars on highways running through their cities to accommodate suburbanites? You may think its trying to force people to live a certain way, but maybe you should consider it from the alternative perspective -- people living in the suburbs get to impose their preferences on those who live within the city.
January 19, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, E Rocc said: The county is 2/3 suburban, let alone the metro area and double let alone the state. Checkout building permits pulled during 2012 - 2022 and recent city tax income revenue. Both suggest the metro and its demographics are changing. Isn't it a bit of a fallacy to say the county is 2/3 suburban? Edited January 19, 20232 yr by Clefan98
January 19, 20232 yr "What happens after a city removes a freeway?" From City Beautiful, very informative video
January 19, 20232 yr 20 minutes ago, Luke_S said: Why should people living in cities be forced to deal with noise and air pollution from cars on highways running through their cities to accommodate suburbanites? Highways also run through suburbs.
January 19, 20232 yr 22 minutes ago, E Rocc said: The county is 2/3 suburban, let alone the metro area and double let alone the state. Ohioans are big on finding a way around what the politicians think they should do. Also, on this point, why do you not apply the same skepticism to the construction of highways? Politicians thought people should own a single family home with a car and so they built the environment to accommodate that preference. By accommodating that preference, arguably at the expense of city dwelling, people changed their behavior. Quote As we all know, while Cuyahoga County's population declined from 1950 to the present, the remaining population has spread out throughout it and neighboring counties. As a result, whereas just 26 percent of the county's land was developed in 1948, this number exploded to 98 percent by 2002. https://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/FreewayImpact022516.aspx The county was 3/4 rural before highways and politicians' preference for them.
January 19, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, E Rocc said: I've heard that replacing it is the next big project, after the 480 bridge is done. Some here seem to advocate making it more difficult to get around this area by private car. Even if that were politically feasible (it isn't), it would lead to economic decline and the area being a less attractive place to locate for most people and institutions. Yeah, I can't tell you how many people move here specifically due to the siren song of the Main Avenue Bridge ...
January 19, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said: Highways also run through suburbs. I don't know that you meant to do it, but this is a gross mischaracterization. Highways cut through cities, displaced people, separated neighborhoods, caused permanent and damaging pollution (noise, soot, smog, etc) in a built up area that never considered such a possibility. Suburbs on the other hand were built around the highways. They were built with the highways in mind and took action to mitigate the negative consequences of those highways. Highways in and off themselves are not bad things. They are, of course, necessary to enable fast and efficient transportation of goods and people from one economic center to another. The benefits start to break down when your primary consideration for highways in a metropolitan area isn't intercity transportation but rather local trips. We all know what this has done to our cities. It's spread them out making many of us dependent on a very expensive form of local transportation (the private vehicle) while also increasing our overall infrastructure cost per capita. Cuyahoga County, as has been pointed out, is a perfect example. MANY more lane miles of road, more sewer, water, gas, etc to service essentially the same amount of people. It's bad public policy and we're all paying for it when we could be investing elsewhere.
January 19, 20232 yr I grew up in Garfield Hts. i-480 cut through the center and divided it in half. The same thing happened in many other suburbs. But we are digressing. Let's get back on topic.
January 19, 20232 yr I know when the west Shoreway was converted to the 35 mph blvd that everyone still does 60 mph on....there were stats on daily car trips on it. It was built for 60,000 cars daily, and by the mid 20-teens there were less than 30,000 cars daily. If the trend towards working at home continues, I fail to see why suburbanites would complain about removing this road and downgrading it to a local road that serves it's neighborhood better?
January 19, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said: Highways also run through suburbs. To my knowledge and after a quick look, not one of these suburbs have a highway in their city limits: Parma Parma heights East cleveland Cleveland Heights University heights South Euclid Richmond Heights Highland heights Highland Hills Seven Hills Walton Hills Bay Village Avon lake, OH You can basically add Lyndhurst and Berea to the list as well as a highway barely clips a corner/edge of the suburb. 1 hour ago, Hootenany said: I don't know that you meant to do it, but this is a gross mischaracterization. Highways cut through cities, displaced people, separated neighborhoods, caused permanent and damaging pollution (noise, soot, smog, etc) in a built up area that never considered such a possibility. Suburbs on the other hand were built around the highways. They were built with the highways in mind and took action to mitigate the negative consequences of those highways. Highways in and off themselves are not bad things. They are, of course, necessary to enable fast and efficient transportation of goods and people from one economic center to another. The benefits start to break down when your primary consideration for highways in a metropolitan area isn't intercity transportation but rather local trips. We all know what this has done to our cities. It's spread them out making many of us dependent on a very expensive form of local transportation (the private vehicle) while also increasing our overall infrastructure cost per capita. Cuyahoga County, as has been pointed out, is a perfect example. MANY more lane miles of road, more sewer, water, gas, etc to service essentially the same amount of people. It's bad public policy and we're all paying for it when we could be investing elsewhere. I agree with the ^above mostly, I love having the great highway access in CLE.... it makes getting around pretty easy(unlike a lot of suburbs). But I don't think we need more highways, and I definitely think getting rid of the Shoreway for better lake access would benefit the city.
January 19, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, Clefan98 said: Checkout building permits pulled during 2012 - 2022 and recent city tax income revenue. Both suggest the metro and its demographics are changing. Isn't it a bit of a fallacy to say the county is 2/3 suburban? I don't see a breakout for "suburban" or a definition of the difference. What I do see is a city population that is 30% of the county population and 18% of the metro area.
January 19, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Cleburger said: I know when the west Shoreway was converted to the 35 mph blvd that everyone still does 60 mph on....there were stats on daily car trips on it. It was built for 60,000 cars daily, and by the mid 20-teens there were less than 30,000 cars daily. If the trend towards working at home continues, I fail to see why suburbanites would complain about removing this road and downgrading it to a local road that serves it's neighborhood better? See, this is the thing - the west Shoreway doesn’t even serve “suburbanites”. The only trips it speeds up are ones beginning or ending in Edgewater or the northeast corner of Lakewood. Maybe parts of Detroit Shoreway. For everyone else to the west, I-90 is better. And even the neighborhoods that do get those faster trips via the west Shoreway, 90 is an option that doesn’t add much time. All this for a highway that chokes off so many neighborhoods from the region’s best asset, the lake. It also seems like it would cost less to repair the Main Ave bridge if it didn’t need to be done to highway standards. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
January 19, 20232 yr 8 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: See, this is the thing - the west Shoreway doesn’t even serve “suburbanites”. The only trips it speeds up are ones beginning or ending in Edgewater or the northeast corner of Lakewood. Maybe parts of Detroit Shoreway. For everyone else to the west, I-90 is better. And even the neighborhoods that do get those faster trips via the west Shoreway, 90 is an option that doesn’t add much time. All this for a highway that chokes off so many neighborhoods from the region’s best asset, the lake. The east side is different because 90 and the Shoreway are the same thing from downtown to eastern Euclid, and once it gets to Bratenhal it dips away from the lake. It's a good half mile south of it by me.
January 19, 20232 yr Just now, E Rocc said: The east side is different because 90 and the Shoreway are the same thing from downtown to eastern Euclid, and once it gets to Bratenhal it dips away from the lake. It's a good half mile south of it by me. One of my main points of emphasis is that discussions of removing the Shoreway west of the innerbelt are VERY different than discussions of removing the Shoreway to the East. I don’t think the latter is at all feasible, while I strongly believe the former would be an excellent project for the region to rally around. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
January 19, 20232 yr 34 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: One of my main points of emphasis is that discussions of removing the Shoreway west of the innerbelt are VERY different than discussions of removing the Shoreway to the East. I don’t think the latter is at all feasible, while I strongly believe the former would be an excellent project for the region to rally around. My experience with Waterloo suggests to me that it would be very disruptive of downtown and cause more harm than good. Plus the $$.
January 19, 20232 yr 46 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: See, this is the thing - the west Shoreway doesn’t even serve “suburbanites”. The only trips it speeds up are ones beginning or ending in Edgewater or the northeast corner of Lakewood. Maybe parts of Detroit Shoreway. For everyone else to the west, I-90 is better. Not entirely true. The design of West Blvd from 90 north to Baltic Ave caters to suburbanites cutting through the neighborhood to get to the Shoreway.
January 20, 20232 yr Just another periodic reminder for people to be civil to each other, avoid name calling, and stay on topic.
January 21, 20232 yr On 1/19/2023 at 8:39 AM, Luke_S said: Also, on this point, why do you not apply the same skepticism to the construction of highways? Politicians thought people should own a single family home with a car and so they built the environment to accommodate that preference. By accommodating that preference, arguably at the expense of city dwelling, people changed their behavior. https://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/FreewayImpact022516.aspx The county was 3/4 rural before highways and politicians' preference for them. Before the end of WWII. We've discussed in the sprawl thread the many reasons this happened then.
June 23, 20231 yr This doesn't happen if you're doing 35 MPH. The guy was probably doing 70, as I see people doing all the time. This tree was lucky. Tomorrow may be a SUV plowing into a group of people on the bike path, or down the hill to Edgewater. 2 men hospitalized after SUV crashes into tree off West Shoreway CLEVELAND, Ohio (WOIO) - A SUV crashed into a tree sending two men to the hospital Thursday night on Cleveland’s West Shoreway. Police said the SUV was traveling westbound on the Shoreway when it crossed the eastbound lanes went up a hill and smashed into a tree near the end of West 58th. https://www.cleveland19.com/2023/06/23/2-men-hospitalized-after-suv-crashes-into-tree-off-west-shoreway/
June 23, 20231 yr I know we have talked this issue to death and it is water under the bridge but they should have done the original plan with intersections and at least one stop light between the bridge and Clifton. NOBODY does 35 MPH as currently designed. Would have probably opened up more development opportunities. Anyway Blah Blah Blah
Create an account or sign in to comment