Ethan

One cool positive side effect of turning the shoreway into a boulevard is that it opens up a lot of space for the rock and roll Hall of fame expansion. The northwest corner of ninth and the new boulevard looks particularly intriguing. Hopefully the city follows through on it's earlier statements to work with the Rock Hall, there is some great opportunity for synchronous development here!

Good to see that this is at least being discussed. Fingers crossed! https://www.cleveland.com/business/2022/01/cleveland-hopkins-officials-making-push-for-nonstop-flight-to-europe-but-route-will-need-financial-help.html

That's awsome! Does anyone know what new sections of Euclid Creek Greenway the article is referring to? I've seen a few possible extensions mentioned online, the most exciting of which is connecting Euclid Creek Park to Euclid Beach Park, but I've also seen a more tame extension to Euclid Ave proposed.

Thanks, out of curiosity, do you you know which non-profits?

An interesting tidbit from the agenda for the upcoming Metroparks board meeting (1/20). It looks like The Foundry got some government money to build a boardwalk in partnership with the MetroParks, along with some other cool things!

I can't find this agenda anymore, but do you know if the plan is to keep all of the existing trees for these improvements? Also, does anyone if the circle square developments will preserve any of the existing trees in the circle area? Just eyeballing it, it looks like there are several healthy mature trees that could (and should) be saved.

Have these properties officially changed hands? If not, any news? (The metroparks app, and https://clevelandgis.maps would indicate they have not).

https://www.bizjournals.com/cleveland/news/2022/01/12/flats-forward-sees-clevelands-flats-south.html?ana=cleveland Interview with Jim Haviland executive director of Flats Forward about development in the Flats, particularly the southern parts.

It only impacts anything is the issue passes. If it passes the legislators will have to assume that the majority of people agree with that one person who spearheaded the ballot initiative. True or not. Or else they will face the wrath of those same voters next cycle. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of public groundswells started with one person. Even if you don't agree with 'em it is really cool to hear that one person can still make a difference in this democracy! Anyway, here's hoping that whatever happens is the best things for the local residents!

Everyone here seems to be looking at this from a legal perspective. I think the political perspective is far more important in this case. (Am I missing something?) If any issue passes through a voter referendum it will be very difficult for any elected representative who wishes for a future in politics to be seen to be working contrary to the expressed interests of the people. To my mind, that will force them to try to enact the best faith reading of the motion, and fighting for it in court (even if it is futile to do so). I don't know the local politics of Cleveland Heights, but generally speaking, attempting to undermine a passed referendum would be political suicide.

I like them, but as these are entirely unofficial renderings there's isn't really any sense going into it. Anything will be an improvement over a surface parking lot!

Great job as always! Out of curiosity, is the plaza at E 4th and Prospect based on any preliminary rumors or just artistic license?

As a counterpoint to the light the bridges argument, sure it would be pretty, but it would also add a totally unnecessary source of light pollution, along with being a pure waste of energy. I don't think either of these things are huge issues in and of themselves, but how much extra harm should we be willing to do the planet and local animal populace in exchange for something purely aesthetic? Put another way, how much should we be willing to sacrifice for the local and global environment, and is aesthetic lighting one of those things? (Not to even mention sleep quality and potential mental health benefits).

I agree with basically all of this too. The original point was in reference to a comparison between cities and less dense areas. That is the context of my reply. (Also, I've found that many people who grew up in rural areas have a much lower standard for what constitutes 'loud' than people who live in urban areas). My point more broadly is that it's a pointless argument which will convince absolutely no one on the fence. To be more convincing it helps to cede a bit of ground, let in some nuance, and then people are more willing to hear what you have to say. Instead of: "cities aren't loud, cars are!" Say "yes, cities can be a bit loud at times, but a lot of that noise is actually due to cars. By focusing on increasing public transportation and reducing road speeds the noise of cities can be greatly reduced" This then presents a great opportunity transition into other talking points or a broader conversation. However if you lead off with a comment like "cities aren't loud, cars are". No one is going to listen to you. Nor should they. I've been in third world markets without a car in sight, trust me, they're loud, because people make noise! If there are a lot of people around it gets loud. Also, the other half of my post was talking about cars and crowdedness. Crowded is just a pejorative form of density. Same denotation, different connotation. You can't have density without it being crowded to some people. Again, I'm not really sure that we really disagree on anything here, besides style. The nuanced version of the point you're making basically agrees with the nuanced version of my point. Which is kind of the meta point I'm making, it's important not to lose that nuance.

Thanks! That was an interesting video! It doesn't dispute anything I said, and I don't disagree with any of it, so I'm not sure why you shared it with me, but thanks.

This is a silly point that often gets repeated on this site. Yes cars are loud and take up space, and yes cities would be quieter and less crowded without them, but compared to what? They will still be louder and more crowded than the middle of nowhere 100% of the time. They will be louder and more crowded than rural areas 90% of the time, and they will be louder and more crowded than suburbs 80% of the time. You can be pro-density without pretending it doesn't have any tradeoffs.

Here's a good resource for looking at the tree canopy in Cleveland: https://www.countyplanning.us/projects/urban-tree-canopy-assessment-update/urban-tree-canopy-assessment-update-cleveland-neighborhoods/ Here's another: http://www.clevelandtrees.org/cleveland-tree-plan/cleveland-tree-plan-2020-tree-canopy-progress-report/ Change from 2011-2017, I think the same trends have generally continued in the last few years, though programs to reverse some of them have started. See links. Update from 2020 report Cleveland Tree Canopy Revitalization Program: If you live in Cleveland you might be able to get a free tree planted! see below. https://clecityhall.com/2020/10/05/city-of-cleveland-now-accepting-requests-for-the-tree-canopy-revitalization-program/

I'd like to see a riverfront boardwalk / trail connecting Settler's Landing to FEB. I'm hoping this is one of the reason the MetroParks acquired this property, as it is a crucial central link in the chain. They'll have to work with the nearby restaurants, but it will be easier to bridge two small gaps than one large one. I'd also like to see more pedestrian traffic on Old River Front (expanding the FEB scene southward). This property is a good location for a pedestrian connection between Old River Road and a potential Boardwalk as it is basically flat here, and could serve to blend the FEB area into what will eventually be the larger Canal Basin Park area. I'm not sure what the MetroParks will do here, but there are several interesting options, and I trust that the MetroParks has Cleveland's best interest in mind.

I've yet to find this mythical city that suffers from too much greenspace... but whatever. For anyone who is a fan of the metroparks work you can donate here. https://www.clevelandmetroparks.com/parks/support/donate You can also choose to donate to specific areas such as trails, land conservation, or certain geographic areas. Personally, I think everything the metroparks touches turns to gold, so I'm glad to see them buying more waterfront land, and I think they're well worth supporting.

The most interesting thing about these pictures is how they show the changes in Cleveland's tree canopy over the last fifteen years. With a few exceptions, it looks like there has been little to no progress. In a lot of these pictures we see trees magically disappear. In others we can see a clear lack of growth, as the trees had already topped out 15 years ago. Hopefully we start planting more trees that will grow taller so that if we look back again in fifteen years we will see more progress.

Boom! Facade looks basically compete!

I wouldn't be surprised if this bridge was designed to handle light vehicle traffic for emergency/maintenance situations. Ten is a very reasonable and common safety factor for anything where a failure endangers human life. So I wouldn't be surprised if this was designed to fail at the weight of 10 standard vehicles or more, which might allow for a(n unsafe) tank crossing... 🤣 I'm just theorizing of course, but based on what I would consider smart engineering, which is designing for the worst case possible scenario, and adding safety on top of that. Another possibility is that the worst case scenario was the whole bridge filled with people, all jumping at once, which could be similar or even higher.

This building promises to have some great views, and some fantastic amenities, but, man, some of those floor plans are crazy! Particularly near the curved glass, where some of those apartments will likely feel 50-100 ft³ smaller than they actually are. That said, I'm sure they'll appeal to someone for the right price!

To be clear, either compact map, would most likely be 10-6 in a neutral year, the county line one just has more competitive districts. I'd be interested to see this analysis redone post census.

Then we don't disagree. I was making the case for the 'just a tad' Republican advantage. I agree they are gerrymandering well past that in certain States. I also agree that the splitting counties as few times as possible will result in the best maps all around. It's a simple standard, and the slight arbitrariness of county lines compared to the pure compactness algorithm yields more competitive districts. 538 suggests 10-6, but small point, maybe you're right about local shifts.