Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Streets And Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates Route 21 resurfacing, aging Cleveland water mains and timing of repairs
Summary
Council discussed planned Route 21 (Brecksville Road) resurfacing and how to coordinate or sequence it with Cleveland Division of Water mains work; staff warned significant water-main work could be multi‑year and large in scale, and recommended further feasibility discussions with Cleveland Water.
City staff briefed council on the planned Route 21/Brecksville Road resurfacing and the challenge of aging water mains beneath the corridor. Engineering Director Don explained the city’s pavement-condition rating for the corridor and said ODOT local‑aid funding would typically cover the majority of the resurfacing while the city’s share would be limited to specific elements (curb, aprons, catch basins). He warned that replacing century‑old water mains across the corridor could be costly and take multiple years to design, approve and construct.
Don described three practical approaches if the city seeks to align pavement work and water‑main repairs: (1) full replacement in phases with bypass pumping during construction; (2) parallel installation of a new main adjacent to the existing main, test it and transfer services; or (3) use of cured‑in‑place or epoxylining technologies for limited stretches where appropriate. He said technical limits (valve spacing, access pits, service reconnections) restrict the length of a single lining run, and that Cleveland Water must approve and often lead work on major mains in its system.
Councilors cautioned against simply overlaying pavement if major water‑main failure risk remains. One councilor noted the city has had multiple water breaks recently (Chestnut, Ashwood) and that “the devastation that's done from the water main breaks to the roadways” argues for focusing on the most fragile sections first. Staff said rough city estimates for a full corridor water‑main replacement were large (figures discussed ranged into multi‑millions) and that a detailed feasibility and cost analysis with Cleveland Water is needed before committing to a course.
Next steps: staff will schedule a focused meeting with Cleveland Water to evaluate lining vs. full replacement feasibility, identify priority segments, and return to council with clearer costs and the implications for the 2026 resurfacing timetable.
