surfohio

^agreed. this will be a clearly visible eyesore in, what should be, a showplace waterfront neighborhood.

Very educational and depressing post!!!!

Bus Rapid Transit - Deficiencies and Defects By Paul Weyrich Having written recent commentaries favoring streetcars and light rail and objecting to the Bush Administration's push for so-called Bus Rapid Transit, I have received email asking just what is wrong with Bus Rapid Transit anyway, especially since conservative and libertarian think tanks such as the Reason Foundation and the CATO Institute are all for it. My correspondents are correct. I owe my readers an explanation as to why I am against Bus Rapid Transit. ..... http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/PaulWeyrich/2008/06/10/bus_rapid_transit_-_deficiencies_and_defects

This sucks I hate how visible this location is. Damn, why did Crooked River have to go bankrupt... What are the chances that the new building housing Larry Flint won't look ridiculous right there within the Stonehenge development. Expect the worst.

Kimo's sushi in Ohio City, just off of West 25th. The guy is from Hawaii and does a great job. El Jalapinos on W117 on the Cleveland, Lakewood border. Very good food and excellent service. I can also attest to Mi Pueblo and El Tango, quality food.

"nobody laughs at the kid...."

Nice pics, especially the streetscapes. Glad you had fun up here. By the way, Arena District Video screeen > Playhouse Squares Video Screen And I like how Columbus is using the enormous, quirky advertising downtown. It gives the city a lively, newish vibrancy that I think we're missing in Cleveland.

Re: "Range of retail planned for downtown Cleveland" posted by Cornercurve... I am a big fan of that 16? story building depicted in the warehouse district. Amazing how Pesht would truly change the whole dynamic with not just the warehouse district, but the entire downtown.

I think the best option would be a windows and balcony addition just like with the 8 E. Broad tower down in Columbus: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2925.90.html

I haven't heard any either, but I had to laugh because it's such a cliche scenario you see on t.v. alot. Plus those guys have a whole pile of dirt, wet concrete, bricks and old drainage pipes to keep them occupied!!!

Hmm, how about WE ARE ALL WITNESSES. Seriously though, that's a glaring example of bad planning. That space is even too big for a giant banner of Josef Stalin. I'm wondering what kind of expense it would be to cut out windows on a building of that scale.

"No catcalls today guys....you get in trouble for that here." Construction foreman to his crew on the Euclid Corridor Project.

Today I couldn't stop myself from taking an extended lunch and walking all over downtown. This is one epic sunny day and it's great seeing everyone outside, it's a completely different city since winter left. Anyhow, was wondering about the Standard building behind the church on Public Square. While I don't think it reaches eyesore status, its vast beige windowless frontage toward the Square definitely presents an aesthetic challenge. Anyone know if there is any plan to open the otherwise fantastic Standard building with some windows on that side. It faces south and you would think that would vastly improve offices there by letting some light/view inside.

Thanks for posting the breakwall links Guv...that website GreenCityBlueLake is incredible. C-Dawg I think wetlands and marshland restoration is an integral component of any progress here. And the concepts of restoration and development need not be mutually exclusive. http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/10d-18/point-pelee-national-park-marsh.jpg Chicago is light years ahead of us. The Lakefront Plan dropped the ball.... This MUST happen in Cleveland: In Chicago, protecting the lakefront is the law The protection of a free and open public lakefront is part of the civic culture of Chicago. Here is the city ordinance that helps to minimize intrusions of development. Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront Protection Ordinance CHAPTER 16-4 (CHAPTER 194B*) The basic policies which shall govern present and future development programs for Chicago’s lakefront are the following: 1) Complete the publicly owned and locally controlled park system along the entire Chicago lakefront. 2) Maintain and enhance the predominantly landscaped, spacious and continuous character of the lakeshore parks. 3) Continue to improve the water quality and ecological balance of Lake Michigan. 4) Preserve the cultural, historical, and recreational heritage of the lakeshore parks. 5) Maintain and improve the formal character and open water vista of Grant Park with no new above-ground structures permitted. 6) Increase the diversity of recreational opportunities while emphasizing lake-oriented leisure time activities. 7) Protect and develop natural lakeshore park and water area for wildlife habitation. 8) Increase personal safety. 9) Design all lake edge and lake construction to prevent detrimental shoreline erosion. 10) Ensure a harmonious relationship between the lakeshore parks and the community edge, but in no instance will further private development be permitted east of Lake Shore Drive. 11) Improve access to the lakeshore parks and reduce through vehicular traffic on secondary park roads. 12) Strengthen the parkway characteristics of Lake Shore Drive and prohibit any roadway of expressway standards. 13) Ensure that all port, water supply, and public facilities are designed to enhance lakefront character. 14) Coordinate all public and private development within the water, park, and community zones. The Lakefront Plan of Chicago, dated December, 1972, is hereby accepted as an illustration to future development recognizing that specific development proposals will be separately considered for funding and separately evaluated for conformance to the basic policies for Chicago’s lakefront. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO:

"They could be used anywhere outside of the Cleveland breakwater. There isn't enough sand to build a natural beach within the breakwater since it basically blocks all littoral transport." Okay then, I misunderstood. Thats too damn bad. When the Port relocates, there might be an argument for removal of some of the harbor breakwall. This would allow for some littoral drift, and give Whiskey Island/Wendy Park an honest chance of being a real beach.

Thanks for posting the pics!! And those would work even at the depth of the lake where the breakwall is located? I'm not against them being off the breakwall, just at edgewater park, it being one of the few places in the area with naturally breaking waves. "East Harbor used to be by far Ohio's largest beach, with over 2.5 miles of uninterrupted sand....The southern part was wiped out by a nightmare storm in 1972. The majority of the beach has not been restored due to lack of state funding" Why does every state on the east coast replenish their beaches with OUR money, and we can't get fed money here???

Oh man, I hate those things!!! Very dangerous for surfing and swimming, not to mention they look very unnatural. I am not against the tombolos I've seen on wiki/google on a larger scale, but those Presque Isle formations are not good. In fact, I worked to convince Chris Ronayne to remove a similar proposal at Edgewater Park under the Lakefront Plan. But I definitely agree with your Wetlands/marsh restoration. Sign me up.

Unless your a big developer, I don't think there's a silver bullet solution....just try and get more people involved with realizing this great resource we have. ps. Here's some info on the Ohio Coastal Managment Program that nobody knows about: http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Default.aspx?alias=www.dnr.state.oh.us/coastal

Hey C-Dawg are the jetty's parallel to the beach in Presqu Isle considered tombolos?

Being that the state government functions 130 miles away from Lake Erie, don't expect coastal issues to be addressed with the kind of urgency that they require. I buckled and reluctantly headed over the the Rib Fest at Tower City Amp on Saturday, and I'm actually glad I went. The place was just packed with all kinds of people. The best thing was the waterfront ambience, the festival atmostphere, you could feel it. It is just something you can't ever get in Solon, Strongsville or Medina. Now this is what kills me. The rib fest is a stupid ripoff but it is a good draw nonetheless because of the atmosphere. Imagine what kind of regional magnet an established boardwalk area in this town could be, a place with arcades, shopping, and waterfront views. It's such a simple concept really. \ A place like a renewed Euclid Beach Park could practically materialize overnight at Scranton Peninsula or elsewhere, becoming the kind of draw that brings people back to the water.

Very good points MTS, that things got out of balance very much in favor of industry. Even if someone had a nice place on the Lake, for some years you wouldn't want to even go near the water. This could explain why so many lakefront properties focus solely on "the view" and completely ignore that often times, the "beaches" are actually horrible pile of concrete, landfill, metal and other refuse (see Lakewood, Bratenhal, etc.) Oh, and as far as how "natural" the shoreline is now, another criticism of the Lakefront Plan is the best coastal engineers were never brought in to consult on how much restoration is actually possible. We could look to Toronto, who is light years ahead of us right now with re-connecting to their lakefront. But also agree with C-Dawg that the beaches, including Edgewater Park, were once very very beautiful and well maintained. And lets be clear, the problems with the Lake are STATE WIDE and not unique to Cleveland.

The Lakefront is certainly Cleveland's most underutilized asset, and a very frustrating issue to address. Whereas many other coastal cities benefit greatly using their location as a magnet to tourism and a high quality of life, our shoreline languishes under the horrible decisions made over the last hundred years. I have to give props to the Campbell Administration for attempting to make the waterfront a major priority. However, the most disappointing aspects of the Lakefront Plan is 1. the plan has no teeth, there is no point of legal enforcement (so it's merely a passive guideline of nice graphics) and 2. the very long duration is not nearly as motivating as broader, quicker, more immediate solutions. The reality that things might not really change that much in our lifetime is a real downer. Another sad reality is that the future of our lakefront is largely in the hands of developers, so at this point we- the public- are at their mercy. There is no statutory requirement to increase or maintain any public access to the waterfront. And because of "home rule" in Ohio, that is something that may have to be remedied at the state level. But as far as making a difference goes, legally ensuring the right public access would be a major victory for the future.

Citizen's Vision has the right idea...this is by far my favorite representation of the potential for the Mall site: http://www.conventioncleveland.com/images/thumbnails7.html Conspiracy theory??? This image is no longer an active link through the city planning site.

Here's the Citizens Visions idea. http://www.citizensvision.org/friends-hm/downloads/harborfront_pdf.pdf

Here ya go from zipsnation.com: http://zipsnation.org/forums//index.php?showtopic=9647