Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debate over North Coast Connector ramps up as member objects to planned Main Avenue Bridge truncation
Summary
Councilmember Charles Slife publicly opposed an element of the North Coast Connector that would remove a segment of the Main Avenue Bridge, saying residents and commuters were not informed and warning that the change would funnel traffic into downtown. Supporters said delaying the package risked millions in state funding.
Councilmember Charles Slife used an extended floor statement to oppose a specific element of the North Coast Connector project: the planned demolition of the Main Avenue Bridge segment between West Third and East Ninth and the related rerouting of shoreway traffic into downtown streets.
“I’m adamantly opposed to this aspect of the larger plan,” Councilmember Slife said. He described a survey he circulated on social media and cited initial and later response counts and percentages that he said showed most respondents were unaware of the proposed bridge closure and opposed it. “Are you supportive of this proposal? No. 88.7% of a 77 responses,” Slife said, and later noted the sample grew to about 325 responses with consistently high levels of opposition in the ZIP codes he targeted.
Slife argued that closing the bridge would funnel thousands of shoreway cars into downtown, increase congestion on Lakeside Avenue, and create safety risks for pedestrians and cyclists. He urged additional public conversation focused on the Main Avenue Bridge before work proceeded.
Councilmember Carey McCormack and others defended the package and emphasized the scale of state and federal funding attached to the overall North Coast Connector effort. McCormack said delaying a vote risked losing funding and described a potential $20 million state allocation at stake. “I don't have the luxury to play with money in Cleveland like that,” McCormack said, arguing the administration has retooled outreach and that the project supports lakefront access and multimodal connections.
The council agenda included an item described as Ordinance 5 49 20 25 authorizing amended services related to the North Coast Connector and the transcript records roll-call vote counts for related items: recorded tallies show 12 yeas and 3 nays on the ordinance identified in the agenda as 5 49 20 25. During the roll-call segment several council members asked to be recorded as either no votes or recusals on specific ordinance numbers; the transcript records Councilman Polencik, Councilman Slife, and Councilman Casey asking to be recorded as no on 5 49 20 25.
Ending: The meeting record shows sustained debate about the Main Avenue Bridge element of the North Coast Connector and that council approved related legislation with recorded dissent on the North Coast Connector ordinance; the public comment and council statements indicate the issue remains contested in parts of the city.
