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!

This is a sentiment that the Haslam's and the media are supporting, but I don't think it's true at all. I think this is unfair to Ronayne, and to Bibb as well, to the extent that it applies to Bibb, that they are being characterized as obstacles to development. There is a HUGE difference between fighting against investment in the region vs. voicing concern over allocating $1.2B in public funds to support a development that has shown no credible/substantial economic return. As public servants isn't it their job to be good stewards of public dollars and to be a good steward of the substantial time, money, and energy that has already been invested in the lakefront? Ronayne never said he wouldn't fund a stadium; he demanded to see credible support for the amount of money that was being asked of the public. That's his job, isn't it? If I was thinking about renovating my house in Cleveland, or building a new house in the suburbs and the City/County refused to pay for half of it, does that mean they don't support residential development? Of course not, but that's how Ronayne is being characterized.

I couldn't help but notice that the tone of the letter sounded an awful lot like when my 7 year old doesn't get his way! Hahaha.

I'd prefer the stadium to stay downtown, but if we get a new stadium for free, that's great! The situation was much different when HSG wanted local funds, but if that's off the table, I'd support the BP location. Great news.

Another good tool I've found is the City's GIS maps. https://planning.clevelandohio.gov/maps/index.php There are all kinds of layers you can turn on and off for hours of fun! There is a layer for ownership.

There are plans to build a new airport terminal! This is a really needed project, but it seems like it came out of nowhere. Maybe I just missed it? clevelandNew $1.1 billion Cleveland Hopkins airport terminal will...But first: The airport will build a new parking garage on the current Orange Lot, with spaces for 6,000 cars, as well as a new Ground Transportation Center and RTA station.

A typical project in Ohio City must get approval (or comment) from block clubs, design review committee, Landmarks, Planning or BZA (because the zoning code usually necessitates variances), then permit approval, just to get under construction. Then building inspectors often put their own two cents on things during construction. It's a cumbersome process. This isn't unique to Cleveland of course, but the process goes a lot more smoothly in other cities in my experience as an architect. I think something that is different in Cleveland is the extent to which projects are expected to satisfy the general public via block clubs and local design review. The public comments are often subjective, inconsistent, and unclear and developers in Cleveland must spend a lot of time trying to accommodate them in order to get necessary permits and approvals. In other cities I've worked in, there aren't so many layers, and the commentary from the general public is taken into account, but not necessarily required the way it seems to be in Cleveland. Another area that adds to the process is the fact that Cleveland's zoning code doesn't exactly facilitate the types of projects that everyone wants to see. For example, zoning code typically requires large amounts of off-street parking, but no one wants surface lots in Ohio City- not even the City Planners. This means that most urban projects require a bunch of variances, which then requires design review approval, and so on. If the code was more flexible, or updated to match the environment everyone actually wants to see, this would help streamline things a little bit.

Just for fun...AFC Bournemouth is in 8th place in the Premier League and has an 11K capacity stadium. Looks kind of like the Cleveland renderings!

I'm surprised by all the negativity. No one really knows what they are even asking for in terms of public money at this point. It's implied that they will request a TIF and decline any new tax proceeds. I have no idea what attendance is like at women's soccer matches, but average attendance at MLSNP is about 4k for teams without another team. (https://nextpronews.substack.com/p/mls-next-pro-2024-attendance-report). So if you're looking to start a team with the hopes it grows, I wouldn't plan anything smaller than 10K. I mean, Lakewood High School has a 10k stadium. One of the reasons it's as big as it is, is that it's seen as a community asset. I gotta believe the City of Cleveland could support this to help benefit local high schools and such, in addition to helping the pro soccer teams. ^I'm with @Geowizical on this.

The Cleveland teams will be in the second tier and third tier of the US soccer pyramid. To put it into perspective, the Cleveland Monsters are a second tier team, and the Akron RubberDucks are a third tier team in their respective sports. I love going to those games! And the fly-by-night Arena Football League was a blast while it lasted. And remember that FC Cincinnati started as a second tier team with NO stadium of it's own before being elevated to top tier status. If you need a top tier team in a world class stadium right out of the gate, then I agree, this might be disappointing news. But I'm excited.

Something I enjoy about soccer (especially in Europe- and maybe with USL in the near future) is that smaller teams and cities have a chance to build up to the big leagues. You don't necessarily need a billionaire owner and you don't need the blessing of the Commissioner to get a team. It's all about the team performance, and the fans are very passionate. That type of club culture takes time to develop. I think saving between $110M (NWSL) and $500M (MLS) in expansion fees and starting a more organic soccer culture is a good thing for Cleveland soccer. I still want a top tier soccer team in Cleveland, but I think we dodged a bullet on those expansion fees. Put the money into the team and stadium. We'll get a top tier team if the ownership and City shows that they continually invest in and support their team. PS- Cleveland Crunch were recently in the MLIS finals. They lost, but still cool.