Just a question.  How would the Lorain - Aurora commuter rail take over significant functionality from I-480, which serves people going in many directions when accessing and egressing, and includes actual through traffic (eg. Chicago - Buffalo) ?  What do you see as the trip generators, what would its route be, and where would the stops be?  What sorts of connecting services would be available?

 

Most trips are highly localized. Anywhere from 1-3 percent of car trips on an urban interstate involve intercity travel. The average commute distance in Greater Cleveland is 7.8 miles. The downtown CBD accounts for about 15 percent of the metro area's employment. But when commuter rail is provided, the downtown CBD's share of regional employment increases (as do other employment districts along the rail corridor). As with parking, we typically provide enough pavement to accommodate the maximum number of cars at peak travel times -- 7-9 a.m. and 4-6 p.m. Commuter rail can reduce the pressure for adding a highway lane in each direction during those peak travel times -- as can congestion pricing. Implement both, and the result is a far more fluid highway corridor without adding more lanes that aren't needed for 20 hours a day.

Considering the bridge carries 146,000 vehicles per day and is approaching its design limits of 147,000 VPD for 2038, the extra lanes would be a relief. Part of the issue is the 3% grade eastbound and the center lane merge for I-77 to I-480 traffic - those ramps I think are around 4% or 5%? The planning doc that Mr Sparkle[/member] shared did not indicate that, I think. Traffic, especially trucks, considerably slow down for those reasons. At this time, 8 hours per day is considered rush and congested for that bridge.

 

It looks like ODOT considered adding express lanes into the median as part of this project as entirely separate structures, but that idea was nixed as too expensive. The original plans for I-480 from 1967 called for express lanes, but it looks like it was only constructed with an extra wide median for such a configuration from I-77 to the proposed Bedford Freeway (OH 14/Broadway), and along I-271 south to I-480 (and along I-90 east to OH 44/Chardon). The project is essentially a minor expansion and is ALT 5:

 

Alternative 5 – New Bridge in Median

 

The alternative would build a new four lane bridge in the median and maintain four lanes of traffic in each direction with minimal disruption. The new bridge would replace the existing westbound bridge.

 

Bridge Construction - Construct the new 72 feet wide toe/toe parapets westbound bridge in the median while traffic remains in the normal locations on the existing bridges. Eastbound traffic would temporarily be moved to the new westbound bridge. Replace the deck on the eastbound bridge in two years with no traffic on the bridge under construction. The proposed eastbound toe/toe parapets width would be 72 feet. Traffic would be moved to the final locations and the existing westbound bridge superstructure and substructure completely demolished.

 

Construction Duration – Three years is the time estimated to construct the new westbound bridge in the median. Traffic on IR 480 would not be affected by this construction activity. An additional two years would be needed to complete the construction of the new deck on the eastbound bridge. The project construction duration is 5 years.

 

User Delays During Construction – There would be minimal disruption to traffic during construction. No lanes would be eliminated. Lanes would remain 12 feet wide. The disruption would be overnight changes of alignment from one bridge to another. Short term ramp closures from Transportation Boulevard and to the IR 77 ramps will be required to provide new pavement tie-in to the revised bridge alignment.

Why is traffic growing when the population and economy aren't? That's counter-intuitive, with a bloated, sprawling region and roadway network places unnecessary costs on taxpayers and the private sector. This $281 million (and other capacity-enhancing road projects) isn't a wise decision. It's mindless, inertia-based spending. We act like we have no control over the fate of these projects and our economy, because we're making transportation/land-use investment decisions based on past trends, rather on what we want this region to be.

Population has been growing - just not in Cleveland. Areas that I-480 serves grew proportionate to traffic, and in general, to the rise of automobile travel. I-480, coupled with I-271, serves as an effective bypass of Cleveland. Are you still questioning why traffic is growing?

Population has been growing - just not in Cleveland.

 

Where? Cuyahoga County has lost 500,000 people since I-480 was built.

You are misleading my comment. The population of every city but Cleveland has been growing (perhaps not in the last decade as some suburbs have maxed out developable land). I'm not going to post population numbers, but cities like Parma, Maple Heights, and other suburbs boomed before and during construction of I-480, and have more recently peaked as the region matures. During that time, newer suburbs further south, west, and east have grown - and are still growing, all utilizing I-480 to get to job centers in Cleveland and in the suburbs - that I-480 connects to. Just because Cleveland has declined in population and importance does not mean the county and region has declined. You can blame the interstate, but I'm going to point fingers at NAFTA, deindustrialization, Hough riots, tax incentives in other cities, counties, and states, crime rates, corruption...

Why is traffic growing when the population and economy aren't? That's counter-intuitive, with a bloated, sprawling region and roadway network places unnecessary costs on taxpayers and the private sector. This $281 million (and other capacity-enhancing road projects) isn't a wise decision. It's mindless, inertia-based spending. We act like we have no control over the fate of these projects and our economy, because we're making transportation/land-use investment decisions based on past trends, rather on what we want this region to be.

 

Traffic is growing because jobs are moving to the Beachwood and Independence areas, as well as the 91 corridor parallel to 271.  These areas all have light population relative to jobs, receive minimal transit service, and are accessible primarily via interstate.

The population of every city but Cleveland has been growing

 

Can you provide some numbers of the population growth of cities along I-480 (which BTW was built on the Cleveland side of city boundaries which meant Cleveland had to pay 5% of the cost of building a freeway that helped exacerbate its decline) in the past decade? And since 1975-88 when the road was built? I think you will find that most Cuyahoga County cities along I-480 have seen their population decline since then.

 

Traffic is growing because jobs are moving to the Beachwood and Independence areas, as well as the 91 corridor parallel to 271.  These areas all have light population relative to jobs, receive minimal transit service, and are accessible primarily via interstate.

 

Yes, my question was rhetorical. The problem is understood and this investment continues to worsen the problem. This region lacks the cohesion, leadership and courage to chart its own course. Projects like this show the region (and Ohio) is still running on an inertia established in the last century.

No, Cleveland did not have to pay 5% (and I have found no citation to support that, either). The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 mandated the federal government fund (via the Highway Trust Fund) 90% of IR projects with the state picking up the other 10%.

 

I-480's completion dates:

* Turnpike east to W130: 1980

* W130 to Ridge: 1985

* Ridge to Brookpark: 1986

* Brookpark to SR 14/Bedford Freeway (unbuilt): 1977

* SR 14 to I-480N (unnumbered): 1971

* I-480N: 1974

* I-480 to SR 17: 1971

* SR 17 at Bartlett to I-271: 1965

 

So let's look at:

* Bedford Heights

* Maple Heights

* Garfield Heights

* North Olmstead

* Parma

 

(## denotes approx. era when I-480 was completed in the area)

 

BEDFORD HGTS

1960 5,275 —

1970 13,063 147.6% ##

1980 13,214 1.2%

1990 12,131 −8.2%

2000 11,375 −6.2%

2010 10,751 −5.5%

 

MAPLE HGTS

1960 31,667 103.2% ##

1970 34,093 7.7% ##

1980 29,465 −13.6%

1990 27,089 −8.1%

2000 26,156 −3.4%

2010 23,138 −11.5%

 

GARFIELD HGTS

1960 38,455 77.5%

1970 41,417 7.7% ##

1980 34,938 −15.6% ##

1990 31,739 −9.2%

2000 30,734 −3.2%

2010 28,849 −6.1%

 

NORTH OLMSTED

1960 16,290 146.7%

1970 34,861 114.0% ##

1980 36,480 4.6% ##

1990 34,204 −6.2%

2000 34,113 −0.3%

2010 32,718 −4.1%

 

PARMA

1960 82,845 186.7%

1970 100,216 21.0% ##

1980 92,548 −7.7% ##

1990 87,876 −5.0%

2000 85,655 −2.5%

2010 81,601 −4.7%

 

With the exception of Maple Heights, most of these declines can be attributed to natural causes (death rates exceeding birth rates and the loss of some initial industry). Many suburbs that are celebrated on here, like Lakewood, experience this. But if we expand the scope of areas I-480 serves, like Independence...

 

INDEPENDENCE

1960 6,568 111.5%

1970 7,034 7.1% ##

1980 6,607 −6.1% ##

1990 6,500 −1.6%

2000 7,109 9.4%

2010 7,133 0.3%

 

SEVEN HILLS

1960 5,708 322.8%

1970 12,700 122.5% ##

1980 13,650 7.5% ##

1990 12,339 −9.6%

2000 12,080 −2.1%

2010 11,804 −2.3%

 

BROOK PARK

1960 12,856 393.3%

1970 30,774 139.4% ## (Can you guess what was built during this time? It's large and has been in decline for some 15 years.)

1980 26,195 −14.9% ##

1990 22,865 −12.7%

2000 21,218 −7.2%

2010 19,212 −9.5%

 

WESTLAKE

1960 12,906 162.7%

1970 15,689 21.6%

1980 19,475 24.1% ##

1990 27,018 38.7%

2000 31,719 17.4%

2010 32,729 3.2%

 

All of these regions have been influenced by I-480 (Westlake, by I-90, too). Not all have declined but it's certainly reached peak population for many suburbs as developable land has been expended. You no longer have vast swaths of undeveloped land left, but come cities that have done well with good government and proactive planning, like Independence, continue to shine.

Cleveland needs an outerbelt regardless of anyone's views on urbanization.  Cities with outerbelts (i.e. all large ones) can approach regionalism and planning any way they want to.  We've done a particularly bad job of it here and we can't blame the 480 bridge for that.  We need the 480 bridge AND we need to do a better job of regional planning.

Population figures were exactly what I expected.

 

No, Cleveland did not have to pay 5% (and I have found no citation to support that, either).

 

Can you refresh my memory on the substance of Cleveland's argument in its lawsuit against ODOT 25 years ago for intentionally placing I-480 inside its borders?

Along a disused industrial corridor? Even in aerials dating back to the 1950's, that land along the tracks was not heavily utilized in comparison to the south side in Parma. There was a considerable number of vacant properties. I'm doing a newspaper archive search but I'm not finding anything of substance other than generic eminent domain arguments when it was proposed as I-271.

 

If anything, the argument supports the position that the outerbelt is doing exactly as it was designed to. When it was proposed, I-271 did not exist west of I-71 and the Bedford Freeway and I-480 east of Bedford Freeway was proposed as I-80N. There would have been no true bypass if I-480 had not been fully realized to the Turnpike. Additionally, all but I-271 on the far east side of the metro was built out or being built out rapidly; the industrial corridor near Parma for I-480 was the best alternative. This was essentially detailed as Outer Belt South in the 1944 proposal for Cleveland freeways and the initial 1955 "yellow book" of interstate routes by the United States Bureau of Public Roads.

No, Cleveland did not have to pay 5% (and I have found no citation to support that, either). The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 mandated the federal government fund (via the Highway Trust Fund) 90% of IR projects with the state picking up the other 10%.

 

I-480's completion dates:

* Turnpike east to W130: 1980

* W130 to Ridge: 1985

* Ridge to Brookpark: 1986

* Brookpark to SR 14/Bedford Freeway (unbuilt): 1977

* SR 14 to I-480N (unnumbered): 1971

* I-480N: 1974

* I-480 to SR 17: 1971

* SR 17 at Bartlett to I-271: 1965

 

So let's look at:

* Bedford Heights

* Maple Heights

* Garfield Heights

* North Olmstead

* Parma

 

(## denotes approx. era when I-480 was completed in the area)

 

BEDFORD HGTS

1960 5,275 —

1970 13,063 147.6% ##

1980 13,214 1.2%

1990 12,131 −8.2%

2000 11,375 −6.2%

2010 10,751 −5.5%

 

MAPLE HGTS

1960 31,667 103.2% ##

1970 34,093 7.7% ##

1980 29,465 −13.6%

1990 27,089 −8.1%

2000 26,156 −3.4%

2010 23,138 −11.5%

 

GARFIELD HGTS

1960 38,455 77.5%

1970 41,417 7.7% ##

1980 34,938 −15.6% ##

1990 31,739 −9.2%

2000 30,734 −3.2%

2010 28,849 −6.1%

 

NORTH OLMSTED

1960 16,290 146.7%

1970 34,861 114.0% ##

1980 36,480 4.6% ##

1990 34,204 −6.2%

2000 34,113 −0.3%

2010 32,718 −4.1%

 

PARMA

1960 82,845 186.7%

1970 100,216 21.0% ##

1980 92,548 −7.7% ##

1990 87,876 −5.0%

2000 85,655 −2.5%

2010 81,601 −4.7%

 

With the exception of Maple Heights, most of these declines can be attributed to natural causes (death rates exceeding birth rates and the loss of some initial industry). Many suburbs that are celebrated on here, like Lakewood, experience this. But if we expand the scope of areas I-480 serves, like Independence...

 

INDEPENDENCE

1960 6,568 111.5%

1970 7,034 7.1% ##

1980 6,607 −6.1% ##

1990 6,500 −1.6%

2000 7,109 9.4%

2010 7,133 0.3%

 

SEVEN HILLS

1960 5,708 322.8%

1970 12,700 122.5% ##

1980 13,650 7.5% ##

1990 12,339 −9.6%

2000 12,080 −2.1%

2010 11,804 −2.3%

 

BROOK PARK

1960 12,856 393.3%

1970 30,774 139.4% ## (Can you guess what was built during this time? It's large and has been in decline for some 15 years.)

1980 26,195 −14.9% ##

1990 22,865 −12.7%

2000 21,218 −7.2%

2010 19,212 −9.5%

 

WESTLAKE

1960 12,906 162.7%

1970 15,689 21.6%

1980 19,475 24.1% ##

1990 27,018 38.7%

2000 31,719 17.4%

2010 32,729 3.2%

 

All of these regions have been influenced by I-480 (Westlake, by I-90, too). Not all have declined but it's certainly reached peak population for many suburbs as developable land has been expended. You no longer have vast swaths of undeveloped land left, but come cities that have done well with good government and proactive planning, like Independence, continue to shine.

 

Lol all but one of those communities has basically been experiencing population loss since the 80s, and you're using it to claim that there is population growth fueling traffic and sprawl along the freeway?

Can you properly quote? lol

 

Should I expand to areas I-480 serves? Because I can list out many more municipalities that utilize I-480. These areas notably began declining years after the highway was completed, so your snark is off-base - again.

 

NORTH RIDGEVILLE

1980 21,237 61.5% ##

1990 21,564 1.5%

2000 22,338 3.6%

2010 29,465 31.9%

 

OLMSTED FALLS

1960 2,144 88.6%

1970 2,504 16.8%

1980 5,868 134.3% ##

1990 6,741 14.9%

2000 7,962 18.1%

2010 9,024 13.3%

 

BEREA

1960 16,592 37.7%

1970 22,396 35.0% ##

1980 19,636 −12.3% ## (Can you guess why Berea's population staginated? It's a four letter word.)

1990 19,051 −3.0%

2000 18,970 −0.4%

2010 19,093 0.6%

 

MIDDLEBURG HGTS

1960 7,282 120.7%

1970 12,367 69.8%

1980 16,228 31.2% ##

1990 14,702 −9.4%

2000 15,542 5.7%

2010 15,946 2.6%

 

SOLON

1960 6,333 146.4%

1970 11,519 81.9%

1980 13,950 21.1% ##

1990 18,548 33.0%

2000 21,802 17.5%

2010 23,348 7.1%

 

When you have a center (Cleveland/Cuyhoga County) that has been deindustrialized and is no longer the hub of employment, then you have a radius effect that will affect cities all around it. The interstate was a factor in this, but so were the other issues that I listed above. Think race riots played a part in Cleveland's decline? Or crime? Or corruption? What about NAFTA?

 

 

Only the population data starting in 1980 is relevant. The first section of I-480 west of I-271 opened in 1975. The last, west of Brooklyn Heights to West 150th, opened in 1988.

 

I-480 doesn't serve Solon. US 422 does. One can argue that clean-n-green open land near established urban areas was the reason for the few examples of population growth, not I-480. Ohio's institutionalized urban policy takes resources from established urban areas and gives them to the undeveloped urban fringe which drags the urban doughnut hole ever-wider, then throws cosmetic levels of social welfare funding to help those left behind. So the I-480 bridge is more about making the lives easier for those who are riding the state's sprawl wave farther out, while the GCRTA is forced to make do with less as its taxbase shrinks.

 

Ironically, the cost of the I-480 bridge is identical to GCRTA's unfunded cost of replacing its aging railcar fleet.

I-480 does not serve Salon, but it serves it indirectly. Do we need to go down this route of where demand for highways come from? People in Solon, where there are many businesses and factories, is growing as a result of I-480. Do you think they are locating on US 422, which essentially peters out into a two-lane minor arterial to the east? Or because they are located near the apex of two major interstates?

 

I'm not arguing with you about funding or social welfare and all that because I agree with you on those points. But it's fruitless to damn highways. I have advocated for outerbelts and feeder freeways in an attempt to remove inner-city freeways where feasible - but we don't live in a perfect world.

^Of course Kasich, the governor who could care less about transit or Cleveland, for that matter, had to run up to get his photo-op making the "repair" funding announcement with the gigantic bridges over his shoulder in the background; quite naturally not explaining that this expensive funding for 480's VVB is more for long term maintenance repair work and not of the emergency nature ghat was needed to literally save the Inner Belt bridge. Meanwhile it was reported last week that RTA, the state's (by far) largest transit agency, will suffer a "catastrophic loss" in funding next year by RTA's losing its ability to collect sales and use taxes from Medicaid managed care organizations.  And yet, in the nearly week since this dire news was reported, not one local or state pol, especially Kasich of course, has uttered a peep about this...

 

What a joke.

I'm not arguing with you about funding or social welfare and all that because I agree with you on those points. But it's fruitless to damn highways. I have advocated for outerbelts and feeder freeways in an attempt to remove inner-city freeways where feasible - but we don't live in a perfect world.

 

Doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it and enjoy each success along the way. I don't even see a consensus of what "perfect" means let alone serious efforts to get there. It's so frustrating to see your transit system decaying away with trains being scrapped due to their excessive age, and a big systemwide service cut this year and another that's six times worse due next year. Meanwhile we build a superfluous bridge whose purpose is to, during reconstruction of the other two bridges, save a few minutes in the lives of people of means. Ironic about the time savings. Yet we have no problem or even an awareness of how much less convenient we're making transit by wanting to route buses around Public Square and adding several minutes to each bus trip -- and tell RTA to pay the cost of making its own services less convenient. OK, I'm done ranting. Carry on Cuyahoga County and the rest of Ohio as you have for decades, even though it has produced only stagnation.

I agree there's some elitism behind the Public Square issue, but 480?  Everybody uses that including buses.  It's not either/or.

I agree there's some elitism behind the Public Square issue, but 480?  Everybody uses that including buses.  It's not either/or.

 

One RTA bus route uses it (90F), a route that use to take Broadway from downtown to Bedford but now takes 77/480, leaving long sections of Broadway without bus service.

 

It is an either/or when you fund a non-essential bridge project while essential public transportation is disappearing at rate higher in Cleveland than in any other large metro area. Some of us will avoid having to endure some highway traffic congestion during the reconstruction of two highway bridges. That's a nice luxury. Meanwhile thousands of us have lost transit service to jobs, education and health care in the past decade. More of us lost service this year. And the service cuts next year will be six times worse than this year's.

 

These aren't unavoidable outcomes over which we have no control. We chose this transportation/land-use future. It's never too late to choose another.

But the Valley View bridge is not an emergency repair. I grant you, Cleveland and the country have serious infrastructure issues, especially our highway system that I don't take lightly (if I-480 collapses in Valley View the way the W-35 went down in Minneapolis, there would have been many times more casualties). But 480 is not anywhere near that point; our trsnsit system is; and maybe even worse, but nobody in powere really seems to care... and, oh yeah, let's not even get into the goo-gobbs we're spending on the super superfluous Opportunity Corridor highway.

Buses can use the Opportunity Corridor as too, and they probably will. 

 

On the one hand, we're talking about how feasible it would be to keep Superior closed through the square, even though RTA has already opposed that.  On the other hand, we haven't seriously considered any additional local funding like a hike in the parking tax.  I just have a hard time blaming 480 or any other road for the transit funding situation.

It's not a matter of blaming a particular highway from taking funds away from transit, it's about blaming our leaders for their priorities, especially in starving transit literally to near the brink of its death.

Is it just coincidental that this project is being started as the innerbelt project is being completed? All of the equipment, trailers, machinery, etc. just need picked up and moved a few miles or so. Logistically, it should be an easy transition.

I really don't understand how this is all supposed to solve the traffic issues on 480. If they really wanted to do that, they'd fix the bottlenecks, chiefly 480W at Broadway where it narrows down to 3 lane, only to have the 4th lane return ~1000ft later. And 480E after Warrensville where it first narrows to 3 lanes after the exit, and then 2 each going south and north (which then instantly opens back up to 3). Those areas have way more of a backup on a regular basis then I've ever experience on that bridge. I think Kasich pushes for these mega projects just for his ego.

My favorite is two new bridges for the innerbelt even though I-90 inbound still narrows to a single lane at the Tremont curve.  Bridge could be 15 lanes wide, wouldn't matter.

In relation to the minor population declines (relative to the region as a whole), this nifty article/slideshow at Cleveland.com highlights what makes for a successful inner suburb: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/07/the_secret_to_a_successful_sub.html#0

Strongsville will move forward with I-71 'slip ramp' despite residents' protests

http://www.cleveland.com/strongsville/index.ssf/2016/05/strongsville_will_move_forward.html

Good on these Strongsville residents for opposing this, but it's sad how these same arguments simply aren't raised within the City of Cleveland when it comes to building/modifying highways in heavily populated areas.

Strongsville will move forward with I-71 'slip ramp' despite residents' protests

http://www.cleveland.com/strongsville/index.ssf/2016/05/strongsville_will_move_forward.html

 

Nothing new about traffic “planners” ignoring residents.  Twinsburg decided to put roundabouts on a couple SR91 intersections despite heavy opposition.

To be fair the opposition was largely because of the horribly misdesigned one at Pettibone and Richmond, but still…..

I would recommend more traffic circles for the sake that some of these five and six-legged intersections are confusing, back up in rush hour, and are not as safe for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians.

 

The problem with the slip ramp is that it is a band-aid for what is really needed, an interchange at Brunswick at Boston. The Strongsville interchange backs up well onto I-71 up to the Ohio Turnpike and Pearl Road in rush hour and having cars queue in the right lane just isn't safe or acceptable. The new ramp will dump traffic onto two-lane residential streets that simply are not designed for any large traffic loads (although it looks like both connecting roads will be upgraded to five lanes, but it's not outlined in the article). It's an easy solution and doesn't require removing any houses, but the lack of funding for a new exit at Brunswick is leading to this decision.

 

At least Brunswick and ODOT is working on rebuilding SR 303 in the vicinity of I-71.

 

What surprises me is that this is not a fully ODOT funded project, and Strongsville is having to put money towards the project - along with potential upgrades to the connectors. Brunswick is also having to partially fund the SR 303 upgrades, and would have to pony up money for a new interchange at Boston. I wasn't aware that this funding mechanism was in place - in other states, such interchanges and related upgrades get state/federal funding matches.

^  The ramp from southbound I-71 to westbound SR-82 can be very annoying, because the "green light" time span is too short, and there is "no turn on red" onto Royalton Rd.  Then you often immediately get a red light at Howe.  That whole area can be congested.  I've seen lines of stopped cars approaching Howe and I-71 from the west and lines approaching W130 St on SR-82 from the west.  What about a partial I-71 interchange at Whitney to/from the north? 

 

Well, it looks like the I-271 widening in Macedonia will be wrapping up soon (yeah!), and the widening in Bedford Hts., Bedford, and Oakwood is starting (groan!)  I am kind of curious what they will be doing to get the five lanes out south of Rockside Rd..  It looks like the bridge over Tinker's Creek allows for four.

 

Further north, I have an I-271 request list.

 

  1.  Add an eastbound lane to the Chagrin Bl. bridge over I-271 to directly feed the loop ramp to (I-271 north), which would separate traffic going north on I-271 from traffic continuing eastbound on Chagrin, so the latter does not hold up the former.  Are they ever, ever going to widen Chagrin in Woodmere, lol?

 

  2.  Widen I-271 southbound from South Woodland to I-480 west, as was done for the northbound side years ago.  There are sections of "fourth lane" which serve as "exit only" lanes to Harvard and Chagrin, so this would involve making that fourth lane a "through" lane, and would require an additional lane on the I-271 bridge over Harvard.

 

  3.  Fix the southern terminus of the express lanes, where I-271 shrinks to two lanes with abutments immediately on the left, making for a tight merge from the express lanes to the local lanes.  I kind of wonder if this will still be a pinch point even after the areas to the south are widened.

 

  4.  Partial interchange to/from northbound I-271 at Lander Rd.  People heading to Landerbrook or Landerhaven from the north could exit at Lander and reduce the mess at Brainard/Cedar.  People coming from the south would still use the Cedar/Brainard exit.

 

Let me check my bank account, lol

 

What surprises me is that this is not a fully ODOT funded project, and Strongsville is having to put money towards the project - along with potential upgrades to the connectors. Brunswick is also having to partially fund the SR 303 upgrades, and would have to pony up money for a new interchange at Boston. I wasn't aware that this funding mechanism was in place - in other states, such interchanges and related upgrades get state/federal funding matches.

 

I think the reason is because this isn't an ODOT project in the sense that the State did not initiate it or is it in their 'wish list.' The City of Strongsville is the entity who is pushing for this construction, thus they have to bear their share.

Thanks Enginerd[/member].

 

I had the same concern urb-a-saurus[/member]. The express/local configuration was once planned as far south as the I-480 south split, but when the Tinkers Creek bridge was widened some years ago, it made no provisions for that - only for a fourth lane. The Alexander Road overpass only allows for no further expansion unless the bridge is demolished and rebuilt to accommodate four lanes. A express/local configuration would have been ideal but more costly.

Ordinance No. 1024-16(Ward 11, Councilmember Brady; Ward 15, Councilmember Zone; Ward 14/Councilmember Cummins: Ward 3/Councilmember McCormack; Ward 6/Councilmember Mitchell; and Ward 4/Councilmember K. Johnson): Authorizing the Mayor to apply to the District One Public Works Integrating Committee for state funding for the rehabilitation of portions of Madison Avenue, North and South Marginal Roads, Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, East 116th Street, Fulton/West 28th Street, and Clark Avenue; to apply for and accept gifts and grants from various entities for the improvements; authorizing the Director of Capital Projects to enter into contracts and agreements to design and construct the improvements and other agreements needed to implement the improvements; and authorizing the Commissioner of Purchases and Supplies to acquire, accept, and record for right-of-way purposes real property and easements necessary to make the improvements.

 

Should I assume these projects will include street resurfacings too?

 

Ordinance No. 1141-16(Ward 9/Councilmember Conwell; Ward 10/Councilmember J. Johnson; Ward 1/Councilmember Pruitt; Ward 17/Councilmember Keane; Ward 11/Councilmember Brady; Ward 15/Councilmember Zone; Ward 16/Councilmember Kazy): Determining the method of making the public improvement of constructing the East 103 Street, East 115 Street, East 186 Street, Elgin Avenue, Rockport Avenue, Thrush Avenue, West 83 Street and West 123 Street area sewer replacement or rehabilitation projects, which may include but not be limited to installing manholes or catch basins, and authorizing the Director of Public Utilities to enter into one or more public improvement contracts for the making of the improvement.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2016/10072016/index.php

Cleveland Holding Public Meeting on E. 152nd Street Rehabilitation

http://patch.com/ohio/cleveland/cleveland-holding-public-meeting-e-152nd-street-rehabilitation

Cleveland Holding Public Meeting on E. 152nd Street Rehabilitation

http://patch.com/ohio/cleveland/cleveland-holding-public-meeting-e-152nd-street-rehabilitation

 

This is a pretty beat to hell area with no existing nucleation point.  The money might be better spent on 156th between Waterloo and Lakeshore.

Cleveland Holding Public Meeting on E. 152nd Street Rehabilitation

http://patch.com/ohio/cleveland/cleveland-holding-public-meeting-e-152nd-street-rehabilitation

 

This is a pretty beat to hell area with no existing nucleation point.  The money might be better spent on 156th between Waterloo and Lakeshore.

 

From an "improve the neighborhood" standpoint, you're right, but this road is used as a cut-through for people to get from I-90 to places like Nela Park, so I'm sure that's the motivation for this project (yet another "Opportunity Corridor").

Interstate 271, Cuyahoga County

PROJECT I.D.: 80418

LOCATION: Interstate 271 between the Summit County Line and Miles Road in the cities of Oakwood, Bedford,

Bedford Heights and Warrensville Heights.

START DATE: August 2016

ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: June 2020

BID AMOUNT: $119,988,187

DESCRIPTION: Widen I-271 between the Summit County Line and Miles Road in the cities of Oakwood, Bedford,

Bedford Heights and Warrensville Heights.

IMPACT: Traffic will be maintained utilizing lane shifts. Occasional off-peak lane closures.

 

 

Prime contractor, Kokosing is headed into the 2nd year of a 4 year project. Recently set a northbound contra-flow, that has caused a few problems and snarled morning and afternoon commutes. Love to hear what others think about the design and implementation of this project, especially regarding the traffic control.

Stripe removal on the southbound left lane line left big gashes that are now in right in the wheel path and will swallow your tire.

Northbound past the I-480/I-271 split has a weird lane shift going on.

I have been wondering what the final result will look like.  I can't find a diagram anywhere.  Will the two extra lanes each way south of Columbus Rd be like express lanes?  There will still be the problem (bottleneck), where the southbound express lanes end just north of miles.

I believe this is the current plan. The "express" lanes will go from the I271-I480 merge in Oakwood, under the Broadway-Forbes interchange. All lanes will then merge to form one of two 5 lane wide segments until the I271-I480 split at Rockside. (3 lanes for 271 until the 422 interchange, 2 lanes for 480)

 

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineering/OTEC/2015_OTEC_Presentations/Tuesday_Oct.27/05/Wildeman_Shaner_05_V4.pdf

Here's a crazy "out of the box" plan that should be added into the proposal...build more passenger rail like the Metra or LIRR and then add to RTA rail...less automobiles, less traffic.  Crazy, I know!

Cleveland I-90 construction will bring slowdowns, delays, detours this week

http://m.cleveland19.com/19actionnews/db_330498/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=86wsVu27

Please share your ideas on traffic calming along Franklin Blvd so we can help make it safer for everyone.  Those of us who live near or travel on Franklin daily know how serious of an issue this is.  It's especially dangerous for bikers and pedestrians.  I've lost track of the number of crashes I've witnessed over the last 5yrs.  :whip: :whip:

 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FranklinBlvd

 

Residents living along Franklin Boulevard demand change after seeing hundreds of crashes

 

http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/residents-living-along-franklin-boulevard-demand-change-after-seeing-hundreds-of-crashes

 

 

 

 

Please share your ideas on traffic calming along Franklin Blvd so we can help make it safer for everyone.  Those of us who live near or travel on Franklin daily know how serious of an issue this is.  It's especially dangerous for bikers and pedestrians.  I've lost track of the number of crashes I've witnessed over the last 5yrs.  :whip: :whip:

 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FranklinBlvd

 

Residents living along Franklin Boulevard demand change after seeing hundreds of crashes

 

http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/residents-living-along-franklin-boulevard-demand-change-after-seeing-hundreds-of-crashes

 

 

Is this in part because of the conversion of the West Shoreway?

^^I've always been shocked that the speed limit on Franklin is 35 mph.  That is simply not a safe speed on that street and it should have been corrected decades ago.

 

What is the article talking about when they say that the speed limit must be at least 35 mph on any road longer than a mile?  There are tons of roads more than a mile long in Cleveland that are 25 mph zones.

I read the ORC a little bit when that story first came out to figure it out, and I think what it means is that anything that’s deemed a “major highway” that isn’t passing through a commercial business district is by default 35mph unless the state or municipality decides to set it to something lower. My guess is that no one bothered to say anything when the speed limits were first set and that Franklin just got set at 35 because that’s what the rule book said, and no one really thought twice about it. Eden Avenue in Cincinnati is the same way... it’s a residential road but it happens to connect to UC’s medical campus so it’s 35 despite having no business being such. I feel like in both cases it’s just artifacts of the blanket speed limit assignment process.

Is this in part because of the conversion of the West Shoreway?

 

Too far south for at least half of the way. It wouldn't save any time.

Please share your ideas on traffic calming along Franklin Blvd so we can help make it safer for everyone.  Those of us who live near or travel on Franklin daily know how serious of an issue this is.  It's especially dangerous for bikers and pedestrians.  I've lost track of the number of crashes I've witnessed over the last 5yrs.  :whip: :whip:

 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FranklinBlvd

 

Residents living along Franklin Boulevard demand change after seeing hundreds of crashes

 

http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/residents-living-along-franklin-boulevard-demand-change-after-seeing-hundreds-of-crashes

 

 

Is this in part because of the conversion of the West Shoreway?

 

Yes.  Traffic didn't vanish when the shoreway's capacity was reduced (e.g. one lane westbound yesterday).  Just like squeezing a hose, it sprays everywhere.