Ethan

If I was starting from scratch planning an urban lakefront, I wouldn't put one stadium on it let alone two. Stadiums end up on the water because that's the only place where enough space can be found, but I wouldn't consider them optimal use of waterfront land. But yeah, otherwise I agree with your post.

I didn't realize that this project was coming with a little pocket park. I rarely find a park I don't like, but Asiatown could really use one. interestingly, it looks like it's used for square dancing. Hopefully both the park and the apartments move forward. Here's an article (linked from the above) that has more information about the pop up park. https://www.ideastream.org/environment-energy/2024-06-17/as-cleveland-makes-plans-for-city-parks-some-neighborhoods-are-pushing-for-more-green-space

No. That's a separate question from whether or not we should expand our rail system, but there is zero reason to think that rail expansion is being seriously considered by anyone at RTA. Unless we suddenly get a combination of visionary leadership and philanthropic billionaires it's just not in the cards. The winds could shift at anytime, and maybe they already have (fingers crossed), but there's a lot of inertia to unwind even if that happens. For what it's worth, I agree that we should be looking at upgrading successful BRT lines, and the Euclid Corridor should absolutely be serviced by rail transit. Over the longer term I'd like to see the W25th BRT upgraded as well.

"Modern" big box theaters suck. I make a point of going to the Cleveland Cinemas theaters whenever possible, the experience is far superior. When I lived downtown I'd go to this theater frequently (or take the rapid to Shaker Square), now I can walk to Cedar Lee, but all of these older theaters are a fantastic shot in the arm to the neighborhoods, we should support them.

While a really cool idea, it's ultimately not a direction I'd like to see the City take. I'm certainly down for brewpubs and cool niche hotels, but I don't envision this area as a good fit for manufacturing. There's a reason most hip neighborhoods and touristy areas tend to have almost no manufacturing, they just don't play well together. You have some clever ideas about how to ameliorate some of the drawbacks from manufacturing, but at best any ground level space given over to a canning facility (and it realistically has to be ground level) is just underutilized space in the context of a downtown adjacent lakefront neighborhood. I'm not sure how great an anchor tenant a canning facility is for this type of development. It's not high density employment. And it will be empty in the evenings. I assume this will turn into a more entertainment focused area with shops and restaurants. I just don't see how a canning facility functions as an anchor tenant for that kinds of development. I also think there's just some disconnect between what Great Lakes is looking for from it's new facility, both here, and in the Scranton thread. My understanding is that they are primarily looking for a manufacturing facility. Other features, like a new brewpub are secondary to that. while I understand there are a few very cool examples GLBC could emulate, I don't think they are looking for a cute demonstration facility here, but rather a real manufacturing facility designed to let them produce more beer cheaper. They are looking to expand, not buy more goodwill locally. That's my read anyway. Additionally, unless you are proposing this development as a replacement for their new Scranton brewpub, they will almost certainly have too many restaurants in too small an area, and they risk canobalizing their busines. Great Lakes already serves as the anchor for the (arguably) hottest neighborhood in Cleveland, asking them to also anchor downtown is asking too much of them, and risks overstretching them. GLBC has already done a lot for Cleveland. Like I said, cool idea though, I certainly won't be upset if it ended up happening, but it's not what I'd prefer to see or think makes sense.

Welcome to the club! I think your post deserves to be here as well. I love how you frame unique and beautiful, architecture employing traditional techniques as important to creating a sense of space. I couldn't agree more! I was just in Europe for a couple of weeks, and I was reminded of exactly that. Prague was probably the best example, utilizing a heavy amount of absolutely gorgeous Art Nouveau buildings to make the old town core of Prague feel like it's own place, not to mention making every single corner absolutely gorgeous. This thread was created with the idea of making Art Deco that style for Ohio's large cities. Personally I'd be happy with any more traditional style (and I mean traditional in the sense that it prioritizes being aesthetically beautiful over being aesthetically interesting) but Art Deco has the strongest connection to America amongst the styles that fit that criteria.

An extension of the CVSR to a new downtown Cleveland station that is walkable from public square is such a no brainer that it's unfathomable how many obstacles keep getting put in the way. I'm glad to hear there's still some hope left, but I'm frustrated at how hard it's seeming to be to do something so self-evidently good for the city. This would be such a cool, unique tourist attraction, hopefully the City leaders fight hard for it.

Does anyone have have the failed plan to expand Cleveland Hopkins adding a third major runway where the IX center is? This has been discussed above, but I can't find the source material anywhere.

I have no interest in seeing this building come down until I see the fully funded plan for what is replacing it. Even then it's dependent on the plan. It's easier to tear buildings down than to build new ones. We don't need any more intermediate parking lots.

I'm finding it hard to get excited for this plan. I guess some events will move downtown, which is good. I suppose some parking near the IX center goes away, but given it's proximity to the runways, while still being pretty far from the terminal, I'm not sure how many other users it realistically has. Even with that, a large convention center for a data center just doesn't seem like a good trade. Hopefully I'm wrong, since it looks like it will happen regardless. While not in the cards right now unfortunately, the best use of this land would be for a third runway. I worry that this might be harder to close if that day ever comes, but maybe not, idk. I don't think there's any substantive reason to think this will result in a downtown convention center expansion/land bridge combo, but if it somehow does happen that would be the best way to make lemonade out of this situation. While I hate indefinitely planning the same project, this in conjunction with the Browns likely departure means there is more than sufficient reason to update the North Coast Harbor lakefront master plan. A nice wide land bridge would be a fantastic end to these two sagas.

Everyone seems pretty confident that most of the events at the IX center will move to the downtown convention center. I certainly hope that is the case, but are we sure that many of these events won't just leave the Cleveland area altogether? I don't know that much about these things, I'm just not sure why everyone seems so confident that this wouldn't be the case. Anyone care to make the case for why we should be optimistic about these events mostly moving downtown?

When I first quickly glanced at this I thought it was talking about the other side of Ontario. Clearly not, but I wonder if that is in the back of mind of some of these planners. I previously thought that if you made Huron/Prospect one way between Ontario and Superior there wouldn't be enough left turn lane space to prevent people from driving through the square and clogging it up with cars. However, closing Prospect on the other side of Ontario removes that concern, because now there's no need for a right turn lane, and it could maintain the same dual turn lane setup as currently exists (and sometimes fills up) from Ontario to Huron. I understand most on this forum would prefer not to have to consider cars at all, but until we build a critical mass of high quality public transportation it needs to remain a concern. All of that said, if this is a success and popular with the public we could hopefully be in a position to consider extending the one ways through to Superior

The mini plaza that will be created by this rerouting should be considered as a location for a statue. The one way streets will mean driver visibility isn't really a concern here so it's a fantastic opportunity to add some beauty into the city. Make it a two for one, make downtown more walkable, and add a beautiful statue (my preference would be art deco or art nouveau, classical would be fine too, but I'm pretty much fine with anything except abstract or modern art).

I like the Bop Stop as well, it's a nice intimate venue, but it's pretty small. One of the reasons I brought up earlier jazz styles such as swing or big band, is that you really need a larger room to do that kind of jazz justice. Too many horns overwhelms small rooms, like the Bop Stop, pretty easily. The greyhound building could absolutely support a big band, and there are a few local acts that play that kind of music. Also, I think a big, beautiful, centrally located venue would do a lot more to grow and support the jazz scene than what we have now, which is nice, but arguably insufficient for a city our size. Cleveland definitely has room for more jazz.

Playhouse Square is a Theatre company, if anyone should prioritize ars gratia artis and be okay if that comes across as a little elitist and/or exclusive, catering to a small audience, it's them. People said the same thing about Playhouse Square when it started. I wouldn't mind a less purely jazz focused jazz club, but a pure jazz club dedicated to highlighting and preserving the art would fit in well with Playhouse Square's mission, and since there isn't already one downtown, I think would succeed. My main hope is that it plays some older styles of Jazz with some Dixieland, big band, swing, etc, instead of just modern solo-heavy smooth jazz.

I want that map... Very cool.

I'll join the apparently unpopular side of this discussion by agreeing that bicycles should have to stop and wait at red lights. If a bicycle is in the road all other road users have to treat it as a vehicle. They often don't, but that's a separate discussion. A large part of safety on the road is all road users behaving in a predictable manner. No, a cyclists behaving unpredictably does not only endanger him/herself. while it's true that the cyclists will get the worst in any crash with a vehicle this doesn't take into account the likely possibility of evasive maneuvers by the vehicle operator trying not to hit the unpredictable cyclist running a red light. These evasive maneuvers could result in the car hitting another vehicle, a wall, a pedestrian, or even another cyclists. That said, I fully agree that penalizing cyclists to a greater degree than motorists for the same infraction would be ridiculous. Red lights exist for a reason, namely predictability, and no one should be allowed to run them. Obviously all of these problems get ameliorated with better cycling infrastructure.

Agreed, we should absolutely aim to have the capability to service any plane that can utilize our existing runways. Most of that will fall under the concourse renovation, but we should start thinking about it now. For the record, this is also why I argue we should preserve the space for a third runway when we are redesigning the concourse layout, if that is possible (which it looks like it might be).

One thought I was having... With the terminal being moved further from the runways, and the concourses due to be redesigned, we might be able to rebuild councorses in such a way as to preserve space for a third runway... Obviously we don't need that now, and probably won't anytime soon, but if we can leave room for expansion that could make a lot of sense. Maybe I'll make a quick sketch later, but if you pull all the concourses toward the terminal and maybe utilize some of what was the blue lot I can see making space for a third runway. Obviously there are some buildings that need to move near the western end of the runway, but there's no need to worry about those unless we actually need another runway. For now it's just about preserving the space. Probably a stupid and/or crazy idea, I just figured I'd share.

Here's the phasing video.

Is there a way to make the avatars next to threads show the most recent poster as opposed to the first poster? Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm pretty sure that's how it used to work. With how long some of our threads go I think the most recent poster is more useful information to see at a glance than whoever started the thread In addition, I also think it's a bit difficult to spot unread content in dark mode. The difference between the degree of distinction in light mode vs dark mode is significant. I'm not sure what levers can be pulled to affect that, I'm just pointing it out.

I also can't read the article. But this was the schedule in late 2023.

I'm not sure why his conclusion is that people are moving back north instead of that the Northeast has continued to not expand its housing supply while Florida has. Obviously domestic migration trends could certainly be starting to change (and the timeframe is too recent to really know either way), but this data could be interpreted several ways (one of which is that we're headed into a recession). Obviously on this forum we want to outbuild housing demand and lower home/rent costs, hopefully that's what happening, but that might be too optimistic. Perhaps it's due to people delaying retirement due to economic uncertainty? Alternatively maybe Florida overbuilt in response to the Pandemic migration rate, it might simply be a minor corrective that will only last a few years before settling back to pre 2019 levels. Basically, I'm wary of drawing too many conclusions from this data

Agreed. This has been incorporated into the current North Coast harbor master plan, but we need an intermediate solution in addition to a long term one. (Who knows when all of that will actually get built out?). A temporary structure with some basic landscaping would help a lot to soften the arrival area (I'm assuming the temporary solution would be in the same area as the planned permanent one). Currently it is a terrible first impression for the City. Hopefully they are at least greeted by shuttle buses taking them into a better location from which to explore the city.