Interesting they plopped the SWHQ on the lot north of its actual locale. 

Stormwater collection, native plants, honoring ecological and historical legacy, public gathering spaces, connection to trails.....an emphatic YES to all of this. 

OMG! If the park turns out to be anything like those renderings it has to join the list of great urban parks.

 

We talk about the Chicago lakefront or NY's Highline but this park will be just as great. The trick now is to make the final product look like these plans. No short-cuts, no changes. Bring those images alive!

I'm no scientist but: Bedrock Riverfront + Canal Basin Park + Irishtown Bend = Amazing

^ Oh man, yes it's Canal Basin Park but when placed next to Irishtown Bend Park it makes for a seamless connection. Both are perfect in the renderings. My thoughts are the two of them are really just one long park. And if the Bedrock plans are even half of the expectations Cleveland will have a drawing card. 

 

Imagine connecting them to the Flats and both peninsulas and the OC and Tremont neighborhoods. Imagine water taxis making stops along the way. What a magnet for growth. Imagine those bridges with colorful lighting. 

 

We've been talking about creating a great lakefront but if you see the area from a bird's eye view the lakefront is kind of boring topographically compared to the river. The river is much more interesting. When you're navigating  those twists your mind naturally goes to thinking "What's around the bend?" The river has a hillside creating depth and height. There are great views of downtown from those hills. If we do this right it could put Cleveland on the map . It could be our version of the San Antonio riverwalk. 

 

If you build it THEY WILL COME!

Any insights on whether this nifty little boat will be a part of the park?

 

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/cuyahoga-river-advocates-hope-to-restore-putzfrau-boat-that-cleaned-up-the-river-after-1969-fire

 

It looks like the planners already know what they'd like to do if they can get a hold of that Northeast parking lot, and in a likely oversight, they included it on the last page. 

 

 

I'd love for them to snag up that parking lot, and I'm glad they already have a plan. I think adding this last corner will make the park feel more connected and cohesive, not that it's not already a huge upgrade, but less space for parking would be better. 

 

Particularly since that is the path people will likely take if heading towards Scranton, tree lined instead of through a parking lot would be better. 

Hate to be a downer, but it seems like a lot of grassy lawn and wide promenade in a lightly traveled area.  I don't see a lot of attraction to bring people down, either.  I wish the park was half the size they're proposing, and and that someone would develop some housing and retail on the other half.

^

@X I agree. A park needs a community to make use of it. Hopefully between Scranton Peninsula and the Bedrock development it will create that community. Could also serve the Flats West Bank but it seems like that never sees any momentum. I would like to see some residential infill along Merwin, Fall, and Columbus; but I haven't heard much about anything like that except for one project on Columbus that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

15 hours ago, Rustbelter said:

@X I agree. A park needs a community to make use of it. Hopefully between Scranton Peninsula and the Bedrock development it will create that community. Could also serve the Flats West Bank but it seems like that never sees any momentum. I would like to see some residential infill along Merwin, Fall, and Columbus; but I haven't heard much about anything like that except for one project on Columbus that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

Yes -- hopefully the park turns out to be something that people are eager to live near.

15 hours ago, Rustbelter said:

^

@X I agree. A park needs a community to make use of it. Hopefully between Scranton Peninsula and the Bedrock development it will create that community. Could also serve the Flats West Bank but it seems like that never sees any momentum. 

 

Great point and exactly why I think boardwalk and trail connections are so vital, not just for the parks but for the surrounding entertainment areas. I don't see either being as successful if the mindset is to drive there and park as close as possible in some huge surface lot. These places have to be safely accessible by walking or biking. It seems like we are headed in the right direction but damn it does take a long time! So worth it though. 

 

21 hours ago, X said:

Hate to be a downer, but it seems like a lot of grassy lawn and wide promenade in a lightly traveled area.  I don't see a lot of attraction to bring people down, either.  I wish the park was half the size they're proposing, and and that someone would develop some housing and retail on the other half.

 

I was trying to decide how to feel about this proposal but I think this is a good point. The design looks incredible but it probably doesn't need to be as big as it is—we'll already be adding a ton of public space between Irishtown Bend and (hopefully) the new "Low Line" under the Detroit-Superior bridge. I think a little development in this part of the flats would complement the parks really nicely.

 

22 hours ago, X said:

Hate to be a downer, but it seems like a lot of grassy lawn and wide promenade in a lightly traveled area.  I don't see a lot of attraction to bring people down, either.  I wish the park was half the size they're proposing, and and that someone would develop some housing and retail on the other half.

 

Agreed, we need more city in the city. Not vacuous, unprogrammed park space, unnecessary pedestrian only zones, etc.

It's not like we're lacking for developable land though. I think we can afford to build up our parks along the riverfront and then the density adjacent to them.

The Columbus peninsula needs more than just minor infill, IMO. It has an incredibly cool street grid that's largely wasted right now. The only concrete plans are greenspace from the Metroparks. Some strategic development in parts of the Canal Basin plans instead of all that wide grassy space would be great. Being in the shadow of the Detroit Superior bridge might limit what can be built in this stretch though.

Yeah I'm not seeing everyone's concerns here about taking away from developing more population in the area. This park would butt-up against Scranton Peninsula, the large Riverfront plans, and the West Bank which has a ton of space to develop. If anything this should help spark some development on some of these dormant lots. Columbus Rd on that peninsula could use some big developments on it by the park. 

Isn't the above discussion sort of the catch 22 of urban area parks? You can't justify a devoting a large-ish area to parkland until you've reached a certain level of density/development, but once you reach that level of development/demand you'll never be able to coble together that much land. Parkland is either attainable but not necessary (yet), or necessary but unobtainable. Obviously we are all  hoping for more density and development in and near downtown. I'd like us to have a downtown resident density to rival vancouver, and I'd like us to preserve and develop parkland to support that density, not what we have know. That's because it won't still be possible to construct these large parks once we are that dense, the land won't still be available.

 

Building and maintaining high quality parks is not an impediment to density, people like living near parks (see the transformation near Edgewater). There are plenty of parking lots to build on, let's develop those, and have beautiful, large, waterfront parks near the downtown core. 

3 hours ago, w28th said:

 

Agreed, we need more city in the city. Not vacuous, unprogrammed park space, unnecessary pedestrian only zones, etc.

Unprogrammed park space and pedestrian only zones are huge factors in helping to make a city though. They get people out to sit or walk outside and add people and vibrancy to an area. They're places for people who live in the city to simply exist, places that can act as their back yard while living in an apartment.  There are thousands of residents within a short walk of this park in the Warehouse District, over on the East/West Bank of the Flats, Hingetown, and 1000 more coming on Scranton. 

 

Part of the problem is that Americans generally sit inside and just don't use greenspace that often, if ever. We don't have people using it like you'd see in a other countries around the world and every decent sized European city, just laying around for hours and having picnics. Look at all of the land around the Art Museum, the Mall, and Settlers Landing riverfront area. In other countries these would be filled with people on weekends and after work. I can't recall ever seeing people sitting on a blanket, playing catch, or doing anything other than being on the sidewalks in these spaces. Maybe loitering laws or never seeing others doing it makes people nervous to do it themselves. Maybe we should start an UrbanOhio or Downtown Cleveland picnic club to get people to use and just exist in the greenspace more often. 

 

There are too many parking lots to fill before we worry about building on what little greenspace exists Downtown. Besides, I doubt any serious population growth is likely on this Peninsula until the strip clubs and the noise/crime/people they bring move out. I know 2 girls who left their Stonebridge leases early due to that stuff. But I'm not diving into that here because it will completely derail the conversation. 

Edited October 15, 2024Oct 15 by PlanCleveland

1 hour ago, PlanCleveland said:

Part of the problem is that Americans generally sit inside and just don't use greenspace that often, if ever. We don't have people using it like you'd see in a other countries around the world and every decent sized European city, just laying around for hours and having picnics. Look at all of the land around the Art Museum, the Mall, and Settlers Landing riverfront area. In other countries these would be filled with people on weekends and after work. 

Other countries have high population densities near their parks, which is not common in America.

 

See the Forth Ward park in Atlanta for a new urban park with corresponding residential development. Would be nice to see this type of development around the Canal Basin park.

 

21 hours ago, Ethan said:

Isn't the above discussion sort of the catch 22 of urban area parks? You can't justify a devoting a large-ish area to parkland until you've reached a certain level of density/development, but once you reach that level of development/demand you'll never be able to coble together that much land. Parkland is either attainable but not necessary (yet), or necessary but unobtainable. Obviously we are all  hoping for more density and development in and near downtown. I'd like us to have a downtown resident density to rival vancouver, and I'd like us to preserve and develop parkland to support that density, not what we have know. That's because it won't still be possible to construct these large parks once we are that dense, the land won't still be available.

 

Building and maintaining high quality parks is not an impediment to density, people like living near parks (see the transformation near Edgewater). There are plenty of parking lots to build on, let's develop those, and have beautiful, large, waterfront parks near the downtown core. 

 

Well said. 20,000-30,000 people live within a ten-minute walk of this park between Downtown and OC. Something tells me we'll be fine.

 

Edited October 16, 2024Oct 16 by ASP1984

I was joking about a 30 story condo in the Flat's east bank but really, if you think about the land alongside the river is a perfect location for residential development. Everywhere else around the world people want to live near the water. City government should be actively working with developers on this. We need to promote our assests and riverfront living should be an easy sell. We're already seeing some activity, but we need more, a lot more.

^The Courthouse Plaza development, which would have occupied the notch between the Detroit-Superior Bridge and the Rapid Transit viaduct would have been just that, with the Settlers' Landing station across the street, but Courthouse Plaza never materialized.

1 hour ago, cadmen said:

I was joking about a 30 story condo in the Flat's east bank but really, if you think about the land alongside the river is a perfect location for residential development. Everywhere else around the world people want to live near the water. City government should be actively working with developers on this. We need to promote our assests and riverfront living should be an easy sell. We're already seeing some activity, but we need more, a lot more.

 

I agree--was riding the Red Line the other day taking in the view of the Irishtown Bend project and thinking the very same thing.  That land is RIPE for housing on the upper slopes.   it would seem to be a perfect fit for a public/private development of housing and a park. 

On 10/15/2024 at 1:49 PM, Ethan said:

Isn't the above discussion sort of the catch 22 of urban area parks? You can't justify a devoting a large-ish area to parkland until you've reached a certain level of density/development, but once you reach that level of development/demand you'll never be able to coble together that much land. Parkland is either attainable but not necessary (yet), or necessary but unobtainable. Obviously we are all  hoping for more density and development in and near downtown. I'd like us to have a downtown resident density to rival vancouver, and I'd like us to preserve and develop parkland to support that density, not what we have know. That's because it won't still be possible to construct these large parks once we are that dense, the land won't still be available.

 

Building and maintaining high quality parks is not an impediment to density, people like living near parks (see the transformation near Edgewater). There are plenty of parking lots to build on, let's develop those, and have beautiful, large, waterfront parks near the downtown core. 

 

Emphasis on "sort-of. " There's an important distinction between "urban area parks" and large urban area parks (and the entire question of whether fewer, larger parks are preferable to much more frequent, smaller parks of higher quality and usefulness). Smaller public spaces can easily be created from vacant land (eg. Asiatown and Midtown popup parks), demolished urban blocks (most notably The Mall/Group Plan but also numerous parklets and plazas), former rail rights of way (Red Line Greenway and proposed Low Line path), and even small unoccupied pieces of land (Lighthouse Park). And large parks can still be created despite existing population density: Dike 14 (Lakefront Nature Preserve) added 88 acres of fill on Lake Erie. CHEERS would add even more. Some land is also simply not fit to develop: Burke could probably never be developed with dense urbanism; the steep slopes of Irishtown Bend made future development unlikely as well.

 

Jane Jacobs popularly wrote that the most useful parks are those directly surrounded by residential and other uses. Parks need to have users as well as reasons for people to use them–and what's the point of escaping the city when there is no city to escape? Cleveland is "under-parked," but adding new parks where there are none would add much more value than eliminating urban blocks to expand existing ones. I think the Canal Basin redesign looks great but the parking lots and "open space" south of the bridge seem like they could be better utilized. 

 

Edited October 16, 2024Oct 16 by sonisharri

Some national recognition in the AN:

 

Merritt Chase unveils redesign for Cleveland’s Canal Basin Park

https://www.archpaper.com/2024/10/merritt-chase-canal-basin-park/

 

 

Not satisfied with the oblique representation this line attributes to the current state of the river, but it’s otherwise generally gracious enough. 

 

“The Indianapolis-based landscape architecture office was tasked with reimagining 20 acres along the Cuyahoga River, a water source that’s so polluted, it catches fire.”

Edited October 17, 2024Oct 17 by Pleco

The article states that Canal Basin Park will be completed in 2034.  What is that all about?  IIRC planning for this park began in 2015.  Maybe earlier.  Why will it take 19 years to complete a not so incredibly large park?  Hopefully Irishtown Bend Park will be done well before that and it is larger and a more complex project.

I'll admit I'm pleasantly surprised by the renderings.  The timeline does seem crazy.  I have much greater hopes for the riverfront over the next 25 years than I do the lakefront.  Now we just need to accelerate the housing development surrounding these great future parks! 

15 hours ago, Pleco said:

Some national recognition in the AN:

 

Merritt Chase unveils redesign for Cleveland’s Canal Basin Park

https

 

“The Indianapolis-based landscape architecture office was tasked with reimagining 20 acres along the Cuyahoga River, a water source that’s so polluted, it catches fire.”

 

 

Oh man, that is some very poor phrasing by the writer or another terrible example of AI generated cost saving bs. If you're reading this and you don't live in Cleveland you might think the river is still a cesspool.

 

Come on now!

54 minutes ago, cadmen said:

 

 

Oh man, that is some very poor phrasing by the writer or another terrible example of AI generated cost saving bs. If you're reading this and you don't live in Cleveland you might think the river is still a cesspool.

 

Come on now!

Yes that dig was unnecessary but doesn't sting as much as in the past in contrast to all of the positive happenings relayed in the story to that important audience reading it.  My favorite nugget was: You might not know it today, but the Cuyahoga River bank has had a foundational role in Cleveland’s growth—one could even call it the city’s raison d’être. Mera Cardenas, the executive director of Canalway Partners, noted that the site was the “western boundary of the United States” where Moses Cleveland first landed in 1796. Legend has it that Alexis de Tocqueville took his “first steps” in the U.S. where Canal Basin Park is located.  Alexis de Tocqueville? Really?  Folklore or not we need at least a plaque marker to commemorate - "de Tocqueville was here" and even a cafe/gift shop to add to the curiosity. 

Edited October 17, 2024Oct 17 by Willo

29 minutes ago, Willo said:

Yes that dig was unnecessary but doesn't sting as much as in the past in contrast to all of the positive happenings relayed in the story to that important audience reading it.  My favorite nugget was: You might not know it today, but the Cuyahoga River bank has had a foundational role in Cleveland’s growth—one could even call it the city’s raison d’être. Mera Cardenas, the executive director of Canalway Partners, noted that the site was the “western boundary of the United States” where Moses Cleveland first landed in 1796. Legend has it that Alexis de Tocqueville took his “first steps” in the U.S. where Canal Basin Park is located.  Alexis de Tocqueville? Really?  Folklore or not we need at least a plaque marker to commemorate - "de Tocqueville was here" and even a cafe/gift shop to add to the curiosity. 

My sources are telling me the Metroparks will operate a restaurant called "Tocqueville's Tacoville" in Canal Basin Park

23 hours ago, Pleco said:

Some national recognition in the AN:

 

Merritt Chase unveils redesign for Cleveland’s Canal Basin Park

https://www.archpaper.com/2024/10/merritt-chase-canal-basin-park/

 

 

Not satisfied with the oblique representation this line attributes to the current state of the river, but it’s otherwise generally gracious enough. 

 

“The Indianapolis-based landscape architecture office was tasked with reimagining 20 acres along the Cuyahoga River, a water source that’s so polluted, it catches fire.”

Agreed, @Pleco. The writer clearly did not do his research in this case. Because there was a time when the now much cleaner Cuyahoga River was that polluted, this kind of misinformation can easily have a negative impact on national perception, convention business, and tourism.

7 minutes ago, ArtMasterCLE said:

Agreed, @Pleco. The writer clearly did not do his research in this case. Because there was a time when the now much cleaner Cuyahoga River was that polluted, this kind of misinformation can easily have a negative impact on national perception, convention business, and tourism.

 

Yeah, I'm surprised they're still building parks and public spaces in Chicago and Boston after both of those cities burned down.

7 hours ago, Willo said:

Yes that dig was unnecessary but doesn't sting as much as in the past in contrast to all of the positive happenings relayed in the story to that important audience reading it.  My favorite nugget was: You might not know it today, but the Cuyahoga River bank has had a foundational role in Cleveland’s growth—one could even call it the city’s raison d’être. Mera Cardenas, the executive director of Canalway Partners, noted that the site was the “western boundary of the United States” where Moses Cleveland first landed in 1796. Legend has it that Alexis de Tocqueville took his “first steps” in the U.S. where Canal Basin Park is located.  Alexis de Tocqueville? Really?  Folklore or not we need at least a plaque marker to commemorate - "de Tocqueville was here" and even a cafe/gift shop to add to the curiosity. 

There actually is a plaque for him down there already thanks to C-SPAN!

 

There are three plaques in the park. If memory serves, one is for the potato famine, one is a labor union's time capsule, and the third is for Tocqueville. You can kinda see two of them (I think this is time capsule and Tocqueville) from this Google Maps view. 

 

But I think something more substantial would be very appropriate! 

10 minutes ago, Henke said:

There actually is a plaque for him down there already thanks to C-SPAN!

 

 

"Visited" seems much more believable than "first stepped foot in the US"

19 minutes ago, Henke said:

There actually is a plaque for him down there already thanks to C-SPAN!

 

There are three plaques in the park. If memory serves, one is for the potato famine, one is a labor union's time capsule, and the third is for Tocqueville. You can kinda see two of them (I think this is time capsule and Tocqueville) from this Google Maps view. 

 

But I think something more substantial would be very appropriate! 

 

19 minutes ago, Henke said:

There actually is a plaque for him down there already thanks to C-SPAN!

 

There are three plaques in the park. If memory serves, one is for the potato famine, one is a labor union's time capsule, and the third is for Tocqueville. You can kinda see two of them (I think this is time capsule and Tocqueville) from this Google Maps view. 

 

But I think something more substantial would be very appropriate! 

Thank you that is great news and confirmation!!!  We definitely need to do so much more as right now it looks like a grave marker - but that in itself is so Cleveland. Maybe an initial step to socialize this forgotten history (to me at least) would be for the Canal Basin Group to rename the Mile Zero Park as the Alexis de Tocqueville Mile Zero Park or maybe Alexis de Tocqueville Hope Memorial Veterans Bridge.

Is this a new sign, and if so I'm curious about the fine print... Image from @lwsedla in the SW thread:

Almost nothing on the planning commission agenda to kick off the new year tomorrow, but the one item is big and its the Canal Basin Park.

Here's the presentation:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/v5ay5i591zgqfszr78lrx/ADxouXcPwfTBXjkTEettKD4?dl=0&e=1&preview=20241206+Planning+Commission+Presentation+-+Canal+Basin.pdf&rlkey=m2ggjkfyv0i7hilp8vwbvwsh8&st=t17h80i8

 

Looks as though they are past the community planning phase of the project and are now presenting to the commission for conceptual approval.

They were originally supposed to present at the December 06, 2024 meeting.

^ It occurred to me that Canal Basin Park will be an easy stroller push for young families living on Scranton Peninsula.

That boardwalk makes me excited! If only we could connect that north end of the proposed Canal Basin Park boardwalk to the East Bank Flats boardwalk then we'd have a nice long riverwalk.

 

^ Strong agree! A boardwalk that doesn't connect anywhere isn't a boardwalk, its a dock lol. 

 

p.s. I skimmed through the pdf and am really liking the nature-scaping elements. Every little bit of new wetland or non-pourous surfacing helps out the river and the lake. 

Planning Commission gave conceptual approval, according to the youtube presentation. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOS9OLirIeY

On 1/2/2025 at 3:16 PM, surfohio said:

^ Strong agree! A boardwalk that doesn't connect anywhere isn't a boardwalk, its a dock lol. 

 

p.s. I skimmed through the pdf and am really liking the nature-scaping elements. Every little bit of new wetland or non-pourous surfacing helps out the river and the lake. 

Lillian Kuri made the point that while Canal Basin is a great recreational hub and catalyst she asked for slides showing in red the gaps to a continuous 1.5 mile or so boardwalk so the Planning Commission and other City leaders are held to account until accomplished.  

On 1/2/2025 at 3:16 PM, surfohio said:

^ Strong agree! A boardwalk that doesn't connect anywhere isn't a boardwalk, its a dock lol. 

 

p.s. I skimmed through the pdf and am really liking the nature-scaping elements. Every little bit of new wetland or non-pourous surfacing helps out the river and the lake. 

 

Agreed. Case in point - I've spotted a beaver on the west shore of Scranton Peninsula cutting and dragging branches across the bike path numerous times over the past few months. Nature is 100% interested in returning here!

 

Downtown’s Canal Basin Park design gets early OK
By Ken Prendergast / January 3, 2025

 

Although Cleveland Planning Commission’s Design-Review Committee gave a unanimous thumbs-up today to conceptual plans for downtown’s Canal Basin Park, it wasn’t without some suggestions for improvement. The design team for the 20-acre park, located between turns in the curvaceous Cuyahoga River, will come back to the commission with refined, more detailed schematic designs in the coming months.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/01/03/downtowns-canal-basin-park-design-gets-early-ok/

29 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Downtown’s Canal Basin Park design gets early OK
By Ken Prendergast / January 3, 2025

 

Although Cleveland Planning Commission’s Design-Review Committee gave a unanimous thumbs-up today to conceptual plans for downtown’s Canal Basin Park, it wasn’t without some suggestions for improvement. The design team for the 20-acre park, located between turns in the curvaceous Cuyahoga River, will come back to the commission with refined, more detailed schematic designs in the coming months.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/01/03/downtowns-canal-basin-park-design-gets-early-ok/

 

Weird to be in a position where I don't know which three riverfront parks / developments I'm excited about most.

15 hours ago, ASP1984 said:

 

Weird to be in a position where I don't know which three riverfront parks / developments I'm excited about most.

Luckily is not a Sophie's Choice and we can like all three 😀

Hopefully Governor DeWine was made aware of funding $ needs for all three parks (not just the Lakefront/Burke and Gilbert-Bedrock) during his recent Listening Tour on behalf of his pending decision expected in support of the iinept Browns ownership. If that occurs I hope our local leadersare ready to barter/squeeze the Governor bigly for rare State to Cleveland dollars for all of our critical riverfront and lakefront needs. In this scenario State $ would catapult our current slow incremental approach to each of these public works into radical hyper-change mode.

Canal Basin Park news https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/we-see-it-as-a-very-special-place-big-plans-take-shape-for-clevelands-canal-basin-park.

12 minutes ago, simplythis said:

Canal Basin Park news https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/we-see-it-as-a-very-special-place-big-plans-take-shape-for-clevelands-canal-basin-park.

Very thorough news story.  The only flag is where is Metroparks involvement to better ensure it gets done sooner?

 

It will take years to fully realize the vision for more than 20 acres stretching from the Center Street Swing Bridge to Old River Road in the Flats. The entire project could cost $30 million to $40 million and require significant funding from federal and state governments.

But you’ll start to see smaller – and much less expensive – changes to the site in the spring, from murals brightening up blank bridge pilings to events designed to bring people down to the water.

On 1/6/2025 at 9:23 PM, simplythis said:

Canal Basin Park news https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/we-see-it-as-a-very-special-place-big-plans-take-shape-for-clevelands-canal-basin-park.

Very weird that the current Settler’s Landing fountain doesn’t show up in any of the renderings. That fountain is a very cool and high profile feature.

1 hour ago, ragarcia said:

Very weird that the current Settler’s Landing fountain doesn’t show up in any of the renderings. That fountain is a very cool and high profile feature.

 

Looks like planned removal in exchange for stairs and a wide boardwalk. I won't miss it tbh. Conceptually it's hard to get behind removing any water fountain, but this is a pretty unattractive water fountain. I think the larger park will be better served by the stairs and boardwalk.