Rustbelter

True, it can be done. The places where this gets done are very high demand areas where developers are willing to go the extra mile since they know the end product will demand top dollar. Toronto probably is the best example of this that would be a parallel to Cleveland's lakefront. Lots of highrises there on what I presume are fill areas. Crazy to think that Toronto was basically a peer city to Cleveland up through the 1970's, including a poorly utilized lakefront.

The CSU Master Plan shows the site being redeveloped as a "Partnership District." So I imagine they'll be now marketing the site to various developers. CSU Master Plan

I personally would need more convincing that the lakefront development would happen in a reasonable manner otherwise. Cleveland does not exactly have a great track record of executing waterfront plans, and unless I missed something there are no other major players champing at the bit to develop the stadium/lakefront site. I do not particularly have a great view of Haslam but don't think it's fair to say his plan wouldn't be a development catalyst. I would also frankly rather have the stadium removed from the current location for something better (i.e. a Cleveland version of Battery Park City or Boston Seaport), but this isn't SimCity and the way I see the realities of the situation is that the City is heading in the direction of possibly loosing the Browns to the suburbs while the lakefront becomes deadzone for a decade.

My fear as well, and a very plausible scenario. While I'm pretty ambivalent to the stadium staying at the current location, it's probably not a good idea to push away a billionaire with capital to invest on the lakefront.

Possibly a utility repair but if it's an expansive area it was probably poor planning. Basically the agency responsible for paving is not talking to the agency responsible for utilities. There should be a moratorium on work after a street is paved but I have no idea if Cleveland operates like that.

First I've heard of this one. Ohio City-focused developer readies apartments, rehab near West Side Market

Good article. I too have been house hunting and inventory is indeed tight. And yes, I've seen several disgraceful flip jobs. I also noticed that perhaps local developers are not bringing enough product to the market. I'm sure there are various reasons for this but I still see tons of undeveloped or underutilized lots throughout what are supposedly "hot" areas. Not sure if developer bandwidth is a problem but I suspect that is a reason. I also have noticed that some projects are just not getting off the ground or are stalled/abandoned (see Harbor Whitman and Bridge/47th townhomes in Ohio City).

Looks fine to me. Pretty inline with urban infill seen all over the country these days.

Yup, Lakewood's crime stats do not paint it in bad light at all and I have zero reason to believe crime would be somehow under-counted. My experience on the ground there also tells me that it's a safe urban environment. And while Lakewood is technically a suburb, in form & function it's no different than most Cleveland city neighborhoods. So not exactly like the "suburbs" people are talking about when contrasting them to the city.

Yup, I live in Playhouse Square and heard it go down. It lasted quit a long time (ridiculously so) and I also heard they went on a rampage through residential sections of Ohio City. It really is a disgrace and frankly embarrassing as a resident of Cleveland. Yup, I've been looking at houses to purchase on the near west side but this kind of thing just makes me want to head to Lakewood instead. And I lived in core urban Chicago neighborhoods for the better part of 20 years so not exactly a stranger to "city life."

I hope this is the case given the circumstances that we're working with. Seems like a reasonable solution that will keep everyone mostly satisfied. I would need to go back and review more, but the Haslam concept certainly did provide public access. It's not like it created some sort of exclusionary barriers. Scaling up the public realm portions of the Haslam plan up a bit and moving this thing along makes sense to me but I'm sure it's not that simple.

Is pretty different IMO. The Brooklyn waterfront is next to some of the densest and most upscale urban neighborhoods in the country and has easy access for yuppies who can walk/bike there from their neighborhoods....to go along with the many tourists getting their Instagram shots. What Bibb is proposing will certainly be an improvement from what's there now, but will also be a park without a neighborhood to activate the space when tourists are not around (and Cleveland is no Brooklyn in that regard). I mean if we're playing SimCity and I can give downtown Cleveland a 100,000+ population then sure, Bibb's plan would be ideal. But that's not the reality here. Fun fact - the carousel at the Brooklyn Bridge spent it's former life in Youngstown.

I personally much prefer the Haslam vision to what the Bibb administration has put forward with their plan. I also think with the Haslams involved development would be more likely to come to fruition. If the Bibb administration really wants to bring the lakefront to the people then the focus should be on other areas. There's an entire swath of lakefront from Bratenahl to downtown that needs serious work, so how about focusing on areas like Gordon Park? While Bibb has pleasantly surprised me in some regards his rhetoric on this rubs me the wrong way, coming across like a divisive ideologue. If this is the direction we're going in any potential boondoggle here is on Bibb.

Chicago tax payers will also be paying a significant amount towards this. This site will likely be easily unloaded to developers. It's in a desirable suburb right next to a Metra commuter rail station, so is a prime spot for mixed-use residential development. On the surface it's similar but the logistics in Chicago are more favorable for the Bears staying downtown than the Browns IMO. Commitment of public money aside; - The Bears have an available spot next to the existing stadium where they can build while the existing remains in use. - The Brook Park site, while not in city limits, is right on the border and well served by the airport, highways, and rail. The Bears suburban location is further out and not as well served by transportation options. - The Bears suburban site will be desirable to developers and can likely be sold off in a relatively quick timeframe, but I don't believe the same is true with the Brook Park site.

Could have maybe found something that isn't consistent with the initial soil investigations. There's alway a chance of that but I'd think the engineering should have evauated contingency scenarios.

Anyone know if Carter road is going to get improvements in front of these developments? Seems like sidewalks and at least one lane for street parking will be needed here.

Received a survey from my building management about closing down Huron Road from Prospect to Euclid. Seemed to suggest that it would close down the east end of the street off Euclid but still allow vehicle access from Prospect.

They have done this in Chicago from time to time. Not sure why this would be contentious? CTA signs $30 million contract to bring K-9 units back to rail system

That site should be large enough to incorporate both apartments and a garage that provides public parking. Then of course people will complain about a large building there. If Ohio City reaches its potential parking is going to be an issue, even if it's not a big deal today. I think Short North in Columbus would be a good model for parking management and facilities.

Absolutely. Been asking myself why the city allowed this construction to happen without a temporary sidewak on the busiest street downtown. Seems like a pretty amateurish hazard and I've seen countless people just walk down the small median in center of Euclid to get around the blocked off sidewalk because of this.

South Carolina fans making use of the Arcade to celebrate their Final Four victory.

Chicago's Gold Coast seems fine to me. I lived there in the early 2010's, and while I can't speak to day-to-day crime concernes, there seems to be an improvement in business diversity and some nice infill compared to a decade ago. I think the biggest thing is that Chicago's big money buyers are now looking at wider array of neighborhoods compared to the past. Also the Gold Coast is mostly condo's that cater to upper middle class, it's hardly all properties for the elite. Disagree on this one. Just look around on Google Steet View 10 years ago compared to now. Sure, there are a few empty businesses but in those cases I'd blame the business and not the neighborhood. And it's not like there wasn't business turnover in the past.

Cleveland should prohibit billboards within city limits, at least in certain centralized areas.

the summer fest site in Milwaukee and McCormick Place in Chicago are both on the edge of downtown, not front-and-center like Brown's stadium. These sites would be more analogous to the location of the Muni Lot. Also, the McCormick Center is a major impedance to lakefront access there. Don't like either of these ideas for the Browns Stadium site.

Tend to agree with this. Would trade the stadium being downtown for opportunites to develope the lakefront. My fear is the stadium site would become a boondongle, sitting vacant without any movement for years (or decades). Some others have indicated there are restrictions for development at the lakefront site since it's fill from dredging. Assuming it's not an engineering issue, not sure how such a restriction would be justifiable if someone fights it given this happens elsewhere on the Great Lakes. See Toronto, but even Buffalo & Erie have development on what appeears to be fill areas.