Dino

I do! Reintroduce the street grid, create a waterfront park with access to the water, connections to downtown, dense mixed use development...that's exactly what I want for our lakefront. What's not to like? We don't have to over think it. In 25 years they rebuilt a highway, two professional stadiums, a museum, a concert hall, a major park, created a street grid with about 10 developable parcels with all the associated infrastructure and utilities and underground parking and about 5 mixed use buildings. I'd say they've accomplished a lot in 25 years. If in the year 2050, our lakefront has a rebuilt Shoreway/Boulevard, 1 new professional stadium, a land bridge, lakefront park, street grid, and about 5 or 6 dense, mixed use buildings with retail and parking, I'd say that's a massive win.

Agreed. I didn't even notice that until you pointed it out. They did a good job of making the existing building feel like part of the overall design.

^You can zoom into see statistical information nationwide all the way down to the block level. Looks like I'm not going to get anything done today!

On a similar note, I wanted to post this website without wading into the "Great Density Debate of 2025", as future generations will remember it (just me trying to be funny). It let's you map out a bunch of statistical information, including density. It's interesting to see where the density in our City exists. https://statisticalatlas.com/metro-area/Ohio/Cleveland/Overview

CNUHow Cincinnati’s riverfront was transformedThe Ohio River city leveraged two stadiums and a highway reconstruction to build a new waterfront neighborhood, guided by a 1990s plan.I liked this article about Cincinnati's Riverfront. They're waterfront had many similarities to our lakefront, and I think their waterfront is coming along nicely.

Just because I like historic maps...as of 1898, this parcel (00228088) was your typical Cleveland 0.10 acre lot with two houses on it and a back alley for access It was never subdivided and the new house is not an accessory structure. It appears to be a single family, infill home, in a multi-family zoning district.

This was a vacant lot at 61st and Madison.

Ok, I'll forgive you, only if you forgive me for being an optimist! I agree regionalism is still a struggle, and it's a tug of war with the suburbs. But I'm banking that the 200 jobs lost will be replaced by another 600 residents, and that retail and apartments will create a cooler vibe in this downtown-adjacent new neighborhood. I'm not saying this is great news, just that it isn't the most terrible news.

Having GLBC on the Scranton Peninsula would be cool, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing...GLBC will retain the brewpub on Market Ave, and is still committed to an entertainment venue on the river. So while losing the jobs to the suburbs is s a loss, I'm not that bummed that a 200,000sf production facility is moving outside of the city core. In traditional city planning, industrial uses would be located at the outskirts of the city- or along transportation routes (which are now highways instead of rivers). Ideally, your city core is too valuable to put industrial uses there. You want that land for people. So with an industrial use moving away form the core, and apartments on the Scranton Peninsula under construction, doesn't this kind of indicate that the City is not a "dying carcass", but increasingly a place that people want to be?

Yes Developers build what will be the most profitable. I don't necessarily fault them for that. Makes you wonder why that model is the most profitable though, doesn't it?

I wish they would just let the Shoreway flow directly into Lakeside. I don't know why they have it dead-ending into W. 3rd.

This is really just the urban version of posting a "WILL BUILD TO SUIT" billboard on the highway. But hey, ya gotta do whatchya gotta do. I'm really surprised that they aren't pursuing residential. Seems like a more sure bet and higher demand. My first thought before the article was posted was..."is Playhouse Square building another residential tower?"

Cleveland is a northern climate, waterfront city. It is what it is. Between Toledo and Buffalo, the southern shore of Lake Erie is extremely heavily developed and it is no different than in dozens of cities across the world. I don't see how weather is a factor at all for this site.

This isn't unique to Cleveland. The Raiders, Rams and Chargers all seem to relocate every few decades and think of the Oakland A's, and Tampa Bay Rays. Kansas City is now going through a similar saga with the Royals and the Chiefs. The stakes are higher there though, since in KC, a move to the suburbs may mean a move to a different state. And Kansas is not hiding the fact that they are trying to poach the teams from Missouri either. Long story short, we all think Cleveland is dysfunctional (and maybe it is) but it's not just us.

I also wondered why proximity to the airport has been promoted as such a huge benefit for the stadium too. Who is flying into town, heading straight to the game/event, then flying right out? No one. On the other hand, it would be nice though if the professional athletes and performers could fly into town and immediately be adjacent to their hotels and the stadium. It would be super convenient and probably make loading/unloading gear really convenient. Oh wait, come to think of it, that's exactly the setup we already have downtown! All the athletes fly into Burke! Also, if any fans did want direct access from Hopkins, guess what? We already have that too! Just hop on the Rapid and get dropped off at the stadium!