KJP

Actual design work hasn't been done yet. Only concepts for public input meetings to determine what to do with the Shoreway. some of the concepts have the landbridge continuing at a descending level all the way from the north end of the mall and landing at ground level by the water's edge. But not all do, likely because of the cost. But if does go all the way to the water's edge, I suspect the whole thing will be filled with parking (including to replace or incorporate the Science Center garage). If so, there's ways of making parking garages look like something else from the sides.

As I said in the lakefront thread, where do you want the stadium parking to be? Hidden in a land bridge and associated structures or at the water's edge where the surface lot will sit empty for 350+ days per year? A lakefront is a valuable resource which people would be willing to live near so they can see it and enjoy it. But it is being wasted as a parking lots which are seldom used. Even when the Browns negotiate a renewed stadium lease, I guarantee you that they are going to want to make sure the city provides X number of parking spaces within Y distance of the stadium. Sure, there are other parking craters that need to be filled in the urban core. None are more embarrassing and unsightly or as valuable as those by the water's edge, IMHO.

Where do want the parking for the stadium to be? Along the waters edge so that the site sits empty the remaining 350+ days per year? Or hidden in a land bridge and associated structures?

@bumsquare The land bridge is probably going to be a big parking garage with a green roof over the tracks. While that doesn't sound very sexy, think of it in these terms -- first the city under its lease with the Browns is required to have X number of parking spaces within Y feet of the stadium. I don't remember what those numbers are and I can't seem to find them in Google searches. But I've heard city officials consider that number of parking of spaces (which are in the thousands) to be sacrosanct. So as long as there's a stadium there, a lot of gameday parking has to be nearby. In the absence of a huge new parking facility, lakefront development isn't going to happen. Look at this gameday picture below (which unfortunately cuts off the view of the parking right up to the water's edge at the bottom). Imagine all of the surface parking you see here being redeveloped with things people can live, visit or work in hundreds of days per year -- except perhaps next to the port warehouse at right. On the 350+ days of the year that there isn't an event at the stadium, that new parking structure masquerading as a land bridge can be used to sustain new apartment buildings, hotels, shops and maybe someday, even a new office/co-working building. That could include some high-rises built next to the tracks and Shoreway boulevard with lower-rise buildings nearer to the lake. That would save developers tens of millions of dollars from having to build their own parking structures for each of their new buildings. That's why the city, the county, NOACA, Greater Cleveland Partnership and others are pushing for the land bridge.

Under state law (in another erosion of home-rule), a municipality is not allowed to charge more than an 8 percent tax tax on parking receipts. See: https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-715.09 However, it may be possible that the proposed North Coast Development Corp. is to be authorized by the city and county to levy its own parking assessments, which may explain why the large area was identified as part of its proposed jurisdiction (see the lakefront thread for my post today, showing that jurisdiction map).

Yes

But the total order will still stay at 60.

So I thought for certain this map from my article would lead to lots of speculation and discussion here about the chosen area of jurisdiction for the proposed North Coast Development Corp. (NCDC)... https://neo-trans.blog/2023/05/05/cleveland-has-designs-on-its-waterfronts/

No. There's something going on between Harbor Bay and the city and I can't quite figure out what it is.

Also, a nice flashback to the earlier years of my urban planning experiences....

Michigan rocks. I love Ohio State but the state's politics aren't helpful...

I checked in with Harbor Bay's Dan Whalen about phase 2 a couple of weeks ago. He simply said "No news yet."

Federal Highway Administration Level Of Service (LOS) is one of the most anti-urban policies of the federal government. The basis of LOS is any highway that is jammed with traffic gets a lower LOS rating (D and F) while roads with free-flowing traffic get higher ratings (A and B). Middle of the pack gets a C. So if a highway project doesn't at least maintain LOS or, better yet, improve it, it's not going to get Federal Highway Administration funds. Cities have traffic. Slower car traffic makes transit, biking and walking safer and more attractive. So ultimately projects that improve LOS are more competitive and will win more federal dollars. So the more costly and extravagant highway projects that improve LOS make transit, biking and walking less safe and attractive thus making the city a less pleasant place. People move out of the city, become car dependent, exacerbate urban spawl, and take more and longer drives, thus causing LOS to fall again, necessitating the next short-term "fix". In one of my urban transportation planning text books, this feedback loop was called the "Black Hole Theory" of highway investment. This relates to the Shoreway because traditional federal highway funds could not be used for its downgrading to a boulevard. Instead, there's a new pot of federal highway money to remove highways that divide communities. To secure federal funds, at least 20 percent of project costs have to be funded by non-federal sources. And while most of ODOT's funding is also intended to favor LOS, ODOT can tap one of its accounts for road projects that support economic development. So that can be used for the non-federal share. Despite these funds that support non-LOS-related projects, getting road engineers (at the city, county and ODOT) to accept the notion that their project will worsen traffic is akin to betraying their faith. But their faith has destroyed the quality of life in American cities for 80 years. And it's time to start making cities less friendly to cars and more friendly to people. It cannot be both. It's time to stop bargaining with our car addiction.

Turns out they don't have all of their financing for Gold Coast Lofts yet.

RIP, Nick.

It doesn't matter how many billboards you put up if your state's politics are extreme...

Why yes, at 4 am, Ohio is in the midst of its Amtrak "rush hour!"

There is a new buyer of the site who was supposed to have submitted plans to the city a few months ago but hasn't. I'll have to check with the city to see if that's changed.

@Sapper Daddy One was posted 13 posts before yours with links to more renderings.

Not a tower crane. But I'll take all construction cranes.

Not sure if this is good or bad. Maybe if we increased immigration, kids could spend more time learning and reduce inflation too.

Cleveland has designs on its waterfronts By Ken Prendergast / May 5, 2023 For much of the city’s 227-year history, public officials have been accused of ignoring Cleveland’s waterfronts and especially its lakefront. But now there’s a flurry of activity to turn conceptual ideas into blueprints which will not only help city officials apply for construction funding but to actually build what’s been proposed. Today, those funding allocations for nine waterfront projects were mostly recommended by the City Planning Commission for City Council approval although one was tabled until the next commission meeting. Several of those funding allocations are for construction or demolition to allow larger projects to go forward. MORE: https://neo-trans.blog/2023/05/05/cleveland-has-designs-on-its-waterfronts/

Cleveland has designs on its waterfronts By Ken Prendergast / May 5, 2023 For much of the city’s 227-year history, public officials have been accused of ignoring Cleveland’s waterfronts and especially its lakefront. But now there’s a flurry of activity to turn conceptual ideas into blueprints which will not only help city officials apply for construction funding but to actually build what’s been proposed. Today, those funding allocations for nine waterfront projects were mostly recommended by the City Planning Commission for City Council approval although one was tabled until the next commission meeting. Several of those funding allocations are for construction or demolition to allow larger projects to go forward. MORE: https://neo-trans.blog/2023/05/05/cleveland-has-designs-on-its-waterfronts/