The Observer, February 10, 2006
Volume XXXVIII, Issue 16
Cleveland on Fire: Innerbelt project not the best for Cleveland's future
For months, the city of Cleveland has been watching the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and its plans for the Innerbelt reconstruction. The Innerbelt is the I-71/I-90 bridge that runs by Jacobs Field and through downtown Cleveland. For safety reasons, a new bridge is planned as well as a reconfiguration of exits through what is called "the trench." There has been serious public and private debate over these projects, most specifically the location of the new bridge spanning the Cuyahoga River.
ODOT's plan calls for five new bridge lanes to be built north of the current one (which will remain open). Once that is finished, the old section will be torn down and another five lanes built. This plan has been consistently combated by community organizations and Cuyahoga County Planner Paul Alsenas, who prefer a southern alignment – a new bridge built south of the current structure.
I agree with many community members and see glaring problems with the northern alignment. First, and most importantly, is the location. By building the new bridge north of the current one, it crams downtown together even more into space that is already tight. The new structure would be packed even closer to the Lorain-Carnegie bridge and Jacobs Field than it already is. Take a trip there and you will see the already-congested area – imagine it worse. A southern bridge would allow for more space and a structure built in its entirety at once. Depending on the location for the southern alignment, it would ease the web of exchanges south of the Jake and ideally open up some land for development. Secondly, does the area really need a five lane bridge? If you have driven through it during rush hour, you may be inclined to say yes, but I do not think so.
The current Innerbelt bridge has four lanes and is usually just congested, not at a standstill. Through a smoother design than the spaghetti bowl that currently comprises the system and the construction of the Opportunity Corridor, only four lanes would be needed. The latter project, as I have stated before, would be huge for drawing traffic around downtown that is headed out to University Circle. If ODOT's and Cleveland's resources were poured into that access route, it could be completed before or during construction for the bridge into downtown.
Sadly, this idea appears to have no chance of happening. Recently, most of the public officials from Northeast Ohio convened with the ODOT to offer their support for the northern alignment. This includes Mayor Jackson, Councilman Cimperman, and Representatives Tubbs-Jones and Kucinich – all the leaders have chosen simplicity over a grand vision for the future of Cleveland. Most of the reasons supporting the northern alignment exemplify the narrow vision that has burned the city in the past. One of the largest concerns with the southern alignment would be that it would cause either the destruction of an important area of Historic Tremont or the closing of the Innerbelt for the duration of the project. I do not support the destruction of Tremont, but I do believe that there must be a solution for the traffic closing. By no stretch of the imagination am I an expert in construction, but there must be a way to build eighty percent of the bridge before closing the last section closest to Tremont for a much shorter stretch than the entire time.
A southern bridge that is only four lanes each way should be built, especially in sync with the Opportunity Corridor. The city of Cleveland has the opportunity to make a decision that will impact the next century of transportation, image, and development in the area, and it has currently chosen ease over innovation. Even if the bridge were to be closed for six months, is that not a fair price to pay for a grand entryway to Cleveland? I think so.
