Here we go! Report, debate and speculate!

 

 

As discussed in the Justice Center thread...A few playgrounds, adult swings, rock-climbing walls, spraygrounds, outdoor fitness products and other interactive features can do wonders for a park. Too many of our parks are merely places to put statues and benches.

12 minutes ago, freethink said:

In regard to the image I posted above, my biggest hope is to clear that site of anything involving the  In-Justice Center. My biggest fear is that it would qualify for historic tax credits and it would never change, for the next 50 years it will be the same. But quickly about the park, I think I see Urban Green Space different than most. The ultimate for me would be as if you dropped 20 acres of the Metroparks and placed it in the center of the City, surrounded by residential. I am always looking for a place in the CBD to do that.

I agree, but giving downtown the big park it deserves, and not utilizing either the river or the lake seems like a waste to me. My ideal large park for Cleveland would be to extend Canal Basin park all the way around collision bend, ideally also including the tip of Scranton Peninsula, and connecting to the rear of Tower City. This location is almost entirely parking lot, and has great park potential. It is also poorly served by roads and transport, so it isn't ideal for large development anyway. 

From CLEder in Justice Center thread: "I still think it was a shame that the Hanna Fountains were removed from the Mall. Before they were removed, there was so much more activity on the Malls".

 

The Hanna Fountains looked nice, but I believe they were a maintenance headache, quite often leaking on the convention center below.  

7 minutes ago, skiwest said:

From CLEder in Justice Center thread: "I still think it was a shame that the Hanna Fountains were removed from the Mall. Before they were removed, there was so much more activity on the Malls".

 

The Hanna Fountains looked nice, but I believe they were a maintenance headache, quite often leaking on the convention center below.  

The City should do more with the Malls rather than just a big lawn. A rose garden or other type of floral arrangement would be interesting. 

53 minutes ago, freefourur said:

The City should do more with the Malls rather than just a big lawn. A rose garden or other type of floral arrangement would be interesting. 

Agreed. Personally I would like to see more trees actually on the grass a la Willard Park or Fort Huntington Park, but I don't know whether their roots would potentially cause problems with the convention center structure or something. Maybe put them on Mall C if they're worried about losing the Mall as a large event space.

5 minutes ago, gpodawund said:

Agreed. Personally I would like to see more trees actually on the grass a la Willard Park or Fort Huntington Park, but I don't know whether their roots would potentially cause problems with the convention center structure or something. Maybe put them on Mall C if they're worried about losing the Mall as a large event space.

I think tree roots could be problematic which is why i suggested a rose garden. Although smaller ornamental trees might work in a raised bed.  

As a parent my focus would be on creating more spaces for kids to run around. There's the playground at GLSC, but that is quite the hike with a 3 and 7 year old. Playgrounds don't need to be big and fancy, just have a slide and a swing. Including more play structures within the existing parks would be best, such as in Perk and Willard. I would also agree that the current green spaces lack function, other than to place statues. If the Mall had a soccer field on it, it would be used everyday from April to October. 

So this is the park I would really like to see. It is basically a giant extension of Canal Basin park, into a truly large park. Most of this space is currently parking lot or otherwise underutilized. 

 

I think this park will fully connect downtown to the river, by bringing the park all the way up to Tower City. This may also help to revitalize Tower City, by making it a central point in a pedestrian walkway. 

 

Adding this park will also make at least one bank of the river park/public space from mouth to the industrial valley, with only a few small gaps (especially after Irishtown Bend is realized) which I think is a worthy goal. 

 

I wish the old railroad bridge on the south side of Scranton Peninsula could be remodeled / fixed and made into a pedestrian bridge, maybe even with little shops, like Ponte Vecchio, or Pointe Rialto in Italy. But I think the foundation may be bad based on how the elevated bridge isn't level. 

 

I also love the idea of adding water guardians similar to those on the Hope Memorial bridge around Collision Bend. It's cool to watch the ships go around, but right now there really isn't anywhere to watch them from. Adding a park here would fix that. 

 

Let me know what you think, some of the areas on the edges of this proposed park area could be developed, this is an ambitious idea. I would just hope they are done do with fun interactive street level things that would drive people into the park. 

My two cents >> Cleveland Orchestra could use an outdoor venue in the CBD. Build something like the Hatch Shell on the Esplanade in Boston, or toned down version of what's at Millennium Park in Chicago. The latter looks great surrounded by high rises. 

25 minutes ago, ASP1984 said:

My two cents >> Cleveland Orchestra could use an outdoor venue in the CBD. Build something like the Hatch Shell on the Esplanade in Boston, or toned down version of what's at Millennium Park in Chicago. The latter looks great surrounded by high rises. 

But how often would it be used?  They already have an outdoor venue at Blossom for their summer series.   They have been using Mall B and Public Square for their 4th of July concerts. 

 

Edited March 10, 20214 yr by skiwest

24 minutes ago, skiwest said:

But how often would it be used?  They already have an outdoor venue at Blossom for their summer series.   They have been using Mall B and Public Square for their 4th of July concerts. 

 

 

Hatch Shell gets used every weekend during the spring, summer, and fall, and not just for the BSO, who also has Tanglewood in Western MA (their Blossom). Other community groups have a home and it makes for a good urban living experience. Same can be said about Cleveland choral groups, dance groups, etc.

 

Plus side is that COVID is proving the arts will suffer without more outdoor venues. I'd expect there to be plenty of demand for the space.

Edited March 10, 20214 yr by ASP1984

I was curious about the ratio of park space to people, so I did a little research.  I used a variety of sources (mostly auditors website for park size and credible websites for the rest) and I'll admit it's not scientific, but its a start.

 

Downtown Cleveland (bounded by the river, lake, E. 18th, and Carnegie) has roughly 45 acres of public park space.  This does not include privately owned public space such as the plazas in front of any office buildings (like Erieview Tower, etc.) or any space around the stadiums or museums.  Just public parks.  Downtown has a population of 20,000.  This equals roughly an acre per 445 people.  You can do the math if you want to include the roughly 100,000 daily office workers in the calculation.

 

Ohio City has around 10 acres of public parks.  I excluded schools because they aren't always open to the public.  At roughly 10,000 residents, this equals about an acre for every 1,000 people.  Once the 23 acre Irishtown Bend is complete, Ohio City will have 33 acres total or 1 acre for every 300 people.  There are about 5,000 daily workers in Ohio City if you want to include them as well.

 

Cleveland as a whole has roughly 1 acre of public park for every 130 residents.  This seems to be pretty average for cities of it's size and age.  It's on par with Boston, Philadelphia, Buffalo, and Baltimore.

 

The American Planning Association recommends 1 acre per 100 residents.  This would apply across an entire city, not just a neighborhood, and it appears this recommendation has not changed since 1965.

 

 

yeah ny lincoln center has damrosch park bandshell for outdoor performances. its nice and the circus goes there too. it might be nice to have one round downtown cle.

 

 

i always wished the erie st cemetery was built out with housing around it, like an old london development. it has lots on three sides and the ballpark on the other. that seems like a very attractive setting to me. anyway i think its a treasure that can be much better utilized. and as a bonus you can grab aladdins right there lol.

9 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

yeah ny lincoln center has damrosch park bandshell for outdoor performances. its nice and the circus goes there too. it might be nice to have one round downtown cle.

 

 

i always wished the erie st cemetery was built out with housing around it, like an old london development. it has lots on three sides and the ballpark on the other. that seems like a very attractive setting to me. anyway i think its a treasure that can be much better utilized. and as a bonus you can grab aladdins right there lol.

@KJPmentioned some rumors of a substantial development that involved those lots and maybe the area around the Wolstein Center in one of his seeds and sprouts, IIRC.

Edited March 10, 20214 yr by Ineffable_Matt

28 minutes ago, mas1092 said:

Unpopular opinion here but downtown, at least this part of downtown, does NOT need more greenspace, especially with Public Square and the Mall are literally each a block away. The Mall is super underutilized as it is. Let's focus on making better use of the large amount of greenspace we already have. I doubt anyone actually uses Fort Huntington Park, it's super isolated. 

 

I love the idea of putting the courthouse tower where the park is located, but I don't think the park has to be replaced. I don't like that they would be breaking up the street grid either (or at least it appears that way from the diagrams).

Honestly your opinion seems to be the more popular one, at least in this forum, though I doubt it is more generally. 

 

The issue is that most of Cleveland's park have been the victims of compromises, such that they are not as useful as a park of their size should be. For instance, Public Square is still bisected by Superior, and the mall is split by several lane roads. 

 

The mall is intended to function as a single space, but with the size of the roads both 4 lanes, it acts as several smaller spaces. This problem was highly exacerbated by adding the convention center. The level change it creates makes it very difficult to move to mall C. 

 

Mall C is effectively a a dead end, this problem is shared by both Fort Huntington and Willard Parks, you can't go on from there, you have to walk to E 9th to get to the lake and lakeside attractions. 

 

To make the malls more useful we need to connect them more easily together. This could be done by making it easier to cross the street by reducing lanes, but that seems like it would cause a traffic nightmare. Another option is a dedicated pedestrian walkway. The convention center already creates a raised platform over the street, so some of the work for a pedestrian bridge is already completed. 

 

Another option is ease pedestrian crossing is adding a median, so that pedestrians can cross two lanes at a time, making it easier to cross traffic. 

 

 

41 minutes ago, ASP1984 said:

 

Hatch Shell gets used every weekend during the spring, summer, and fall, and not just for the BSO, who also has Tanglewood in Western MA (their Blossom). Other community groups have a home and it makes for a good urban living experience. Same can be said about Cleveland choral groups, dance groups, etc.

 

Plus side is that COVID is proving the arts will suffer without more outdoor venues. I'd expect there to be plenty of demand for the space.

There are also other community orchestra and the larger City Music that could perform there too. 

There is Jacobs Pavilion in the Flats, although I am not too fond of it.  And it is probably not suitable for fine arts performances.  It would be nice if it could be relocated elsewhere as a classier venue.

5 hours ago, Dino said:

I was curious about the ratio of park space to people, so I did a little research.  I used a variety of sources (mostly auditors website for park size and credible websites for the rest) and I'll admit it's not scientific, but its a start.

 

Downtown Cleveland (bounded by the river, lake, E. 18th, and Carnegie) has roughly 45 acres of public park space.  This does not include privately owned public space such as the plazas in front of any office buildings (like Erieview Tower, etc.) or any space around the stadiums or museums.  Just public parks.  Downtown has a population of 20,000.  This equals roughly an acre per 445 people.  You can do the math if you want to include the roughly 100,000 daily office workers in the calculation.

 

Ohio City has around 10 acres of public parks.  I excluded schools because they aren't always open to the public.  At roughly 10,000 residents, this equals about an acre for every 1,000 people.  Once the 23 acre Irishtown Bend is complete, Ohio City will have 33 acres total or 1 acre for every 300 people.  There are about 5,000 daily workers in Ohio City if you want to include them as well.

 

Cleveland as a whole has roughly 1 acre of public park for every 130 residents.  This seems to be pretty average for cities of it's size and age.  It's on par with Boston, Philadelphia, Buffalo, and Baltimore.

 

The American Planning Association recommends 1 acre per 100 residents.  This would apply across an entire city, not just a neighborhood, and it appears this recommendation has not changed since 1965.

 

 

Useful resource:

 https://www.tpl.org/city/cleveland-ohio 

their "where are parks most needed" map is interesting food for thought. It is also interesting to see rankings compared to other cities, and what their metrics think we are lacking in. It doesn't all jive with my intuition, but they have acreage as one of our biggest weak points. 

Personally, I, too, feel like we already have enough greenspace.  But I am pondering the idea it just seems that way because we have such poorly utilized and developed greenspace currently, it seems like too much/makes me not want more.  If done right (as in, not like the Malls) then I'd be open to give it a chance.

along the lines of building around the erie cemetery, i wonder if any developers have thought about making a new public square park to build around? 

 

not downtown so much, but there are sites for something like that past e55th for sure -- i dk, seems like a lot, but it's just such an attractive option.

 

or for old warehouses maybe something like what developers did with the old schmidt's brewing campus in northern liberties in philly? basically make a big central public piazza with new and redeveloped housing and etc etc around it. 

 

https://livepiazza.com/neighborhood

Our downtown greenspace as is kind of reminds me of going to grandma's house when I was a kid - there's nothing there for kids to enjoy it - it's just functional (exception being the splash pad/water in PS). Sure the malls are able to host huge events as is (it was great for the ASG, InCuya (despite the smaller numbers), Cavs, etc.), but with temporary installations (respecting the convention center roof) malls and greenspace would be more appreciated/used, but that requires an administration that knows what they're doing. I digress hah

1 minute ago, GISguy said:

Our downtown greenspace as is kind of reminds me of going to grandma's house when I was a kid - there's nothing there for kids to enjoy it - it's just functional (exception being the splash pad/water in PS). Sure the malls are able to host huge events as is (it was great for the ASG, InCuya (despite the smaller numbers), Cavs, etc.), but with temporary installations (respecting the convention center roof) malls and greenspace would be more appreciated/used, but that requires an administration that knows what they're doing. I digress hah

 

Great analogy. My family hates going downtown because there's nothing for my 8-year-old son to do except the Great Lakes Science Center. My wife hates the street settings because they're cold, barren and too many blank walls. She's attended conferences held by the Project for Public Spaces and has her own public art firm, representing a Ukrainian artist who designs/builds interactive public art/sculptures, so she's pretty well-versed on subject.

35 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

along the lines of building around the erie cemetery, i wonder if any developers have thought about making a new public square park to build around? 

 

not downtown so much, but there are sites for something like that past e55th for sure -- i dk, seems like a lot, but it's just such an attractive option.

 

or for old warehouses maybe something like what developers did with the old schmidt's brewing campus in northern liberties in philly? basically make a big central public piazza with new and redeveloped housing and etc etc around it. 

 

https://livepiazza.com/neighborhood

 

One way to add some definition to the long bland stretch of midtown between CSU and the Clinic would be a high quality green space developed in conjunction with some residential development and amenity commercial space (which I know is not exactly super viable right now). 

 

I guess the Cleveland Foundation and Dunham people sort have have this in mind, but seems more likely to end up as more blah corporate green space or empty museum grounds. 

We need to turn all the major arteries into boulevards with lush shrubbery and trees. A road diet that also increases tree canopy downtown. Win win.

12 minutes ago, Ineffable_Matt said:

We need to turn all the major arteries into boulevards with lush shrubbery and trees. A road diet that also increases tree canopy downtown. Win win.

😍 gawd wouldn't that be nice. But who will think of the commuters!?!? They may have to wait at a light a little longer on their way back to Chardon!

 

All about it, assuming you could get local businesses/firms/DCA to pick up sponsorships for these strips - the city can't handle what little they have to maintain already.

3 hours ago, mrnyc said:

along the lines of building around the erie cemetery, i wonder if any developers have thought about making a new public square park to build around? 

 

not downtown so much, but there are sites for something like that past e55th for sure -- i dk, seems like a lot, but it's just such an attractive option.

 

or for old warehouses maybe something like what developers did with the old schmidt's brewing campus in northern liberties in philly? basically make a big central public piazza with new and redeveloped housing and etc etc around it. 

 

https://livepiazza.com/neighborhood

 

I think this about league park. Create a commercial center for hough that surrounds the park

I remember when the giant animals were throughout downtown and on Public Square... that was such a hit. People were coming down with their kids just for that! Too bad it was temporary. There are a few really great spaces (the Reading Garden) but overall the issue downtown is a patch of grass with some benches is considered a park. That is not enough. Our huge streets like Superior desperately need bikeways through the center (as planned but delayed apparently). Look at how Superior feels West of E 9th, where there is a tree median, compared to East of E 9th.

4 hours ago, mrclifton88 said:

I remember when the giant animals were throughout downtown and on Public Square... that was such a hit. People were coming down with their kids just for that! Too bad it was temporary. 

As I was reading through the older posts and was about to say this when I saw your post. Spot on! They were great, especially on Public Square and with the fountains. Basically turned the Square into a big playground.

I can't stand all those lawns Downtown, as I've said a few times in certain threads. They look un-evironmental, requiring lots of watering and fertilizing and mowing and there are just too many. Not fitting of a downtown, and are not inviting or usable. Native grasses and plants would be an improvement instead of a 1950's Suburban Dad lawn everywhere.

On 3/12/2021 at 8:00 PM, metrocity said:

I can't stand all those lawns Downtown, as I've said a few times in certain threads. They look un-evironmental, requiring lots of watering and fertilizing and mowing and there are just too many. Not fitting of a downtown, and are not inviting or usable. Native grasses and plants would be an improvement instead of a 1950's Suburban Dad lawn everywhere.

 

This applies to almost all of Ohio. It would be great to see municipalities offer tax incentives for pollinator / native grass installations.

Was out moseying around the mall last night. Was chilly, but a great vibe. So many people were out and about. 

Great shot @marty15! Love the Hilton, Key and 200 the way you shot it! The Justice Center looks as good as it can, lol.  I hope the weather is nice for the visiting media and NFL draft folk. 

What are the spotlights shining on the JC? Is that for the draft? That could be a pretty cool way to liven up the building at night. Same for the back wall of the Standard, if it can't be painted.

Yes, for the draft

32 minutes ago, skiwest said:

This is Grant Park on Chicago's lakefront.  Perhaps Cleveland could do something similar albeit on a smaller scale if FES goes away

This is the kind of large downtown park that Cleveland doesn't have, and I think needs. 

 

I can only think of three places where a park even a quarter of this size could fit downtown, none of which would be easy to make work. I'm wondering if anyone else has any ideas on where Cleveland could realistically put a large park downtown? 

12 minutes ago, Ethan said:

This is the kind of large downtown park that Cleveland doesn't have, and I think needs. 

 

I can only think of three places where a park even a quarter of this size could fit downtown, none of which would be easy to make work. I'm wondering if anyone else has any ideas on where Cleveland could realistically put a large park downtown? 

Well, Burke airport comes to mind.  But that will not happen.  At least not in my lifetime.

I personally think the square needs to be unified, then Mall C needs to have more amenities, and then you have Voinovich Park.   I don't think something like Grant Park would work in Cleveland.  First, we don't have that large of a space.   Second, even if we did have that kind of continuous space, we don't have that population.

Edited May 7, 20214 yr by cfdwarrior
grammar/spelling

33 minutes ago, cfdwarrior said:

I personally think the square needs to be unified, then Mall C needs to have more amenities, and then you have Voinovich Park.   I don't think something like Grant Park would work in Cleveland.  First, we don't have that large of a space.   Second, even if we did have that kind of continuous space, we don't have that population.

I don't think we need anything more but, more paths on the malls and trees. FOR GOD SAKE PLANT SOME TREES!

1 hour ago, Ethan said:

This is the kind of large downtown park that Cleveland doesn't have, and I think needs. 

 

I can only think of three places where a park even a quarter of this size could fit downtown, none of which would be easy to make work. I'm wondering if anyone else has any ideas on where Cleveland could realistically put a large park downtown? 

 

I did a rough comparison of Grant Park in Chicago to the area of First Energy and the open lots/port space surrounding it... the area in Cleveland is about 2/3 the size of Grant Park.

 

This is what I would do.... if FES is demoed and moved south somewhere in the Flats (see the speculation in the Stadium thread), I would fill in the ports, convert it all to park space surrounded by developable land like in Chicago - build in a few roads and that way we could get big lakefront skyscrapers built surrounding the park to give that Chicago vibe. Then, connect it all to the land bridge across Route 2 and you're set. All in all, the green space shown below would equal about 1/2-2/3 the size of Grant Park, which is by no means anything to be ashamed of. Grant Park is MASSIVE.

 

1 hour ago, tastybunns said:

I don't think we need anything more but, more paths on the malls and trees. FOR GOD SAKE PLANT SOME TREES!

 

Not sure you can plant more trees on the malls, given that the whole thing is essentially a green roof.  I believe there are planting wells where the existing trees are.

1 minute ago, StapHanger said:

 

Not sure you can plant more trees on the malls, given that the whole thing is essentially a green roof.  I believe there are planting wells where the existing trees are.

Some flower gardens would be nice.  

Thanks @Geowizical! I didn't realize that area was so large, and hadn't considered that the port could be filled in. 

 

For reference, the area of Grant Park (or at least the area in the above picture) is about 0.4 SQ miles. The only place Cleveland could amass that kind of space is Burke, but I don't want to derail this thread. 

 

Other places that Cleveland could conceivably make contiguous parks that are about 0.1 SQ miles (1/4 of Grant Park) are Scranton Peninsula and the area on the other side of Collision bend. (See below). Combining both of these areas would create a park about half the size of grant split by the river. 

I'm not sure that "big" is what we really need in a park Downtown.  I think having a smart mix of passive and active uses and programming, supportive surrounding land uses, and proper maintenance are all more important than making a "big" park space.

sure you could fit parks there on scrantion, the bend and the lakefront, but given their history and current hopes that is not the best use of those spaces.

 

i would rather see smaller urban square style parks planned and incentivized a bit further out in midtown so they can be built around. there are some tabla rasas out there or almost, so best to plan ahead now. otherwise, it all gets eaten up piecemeal and by the opportunity corridor parkway.

39 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

sure you could fit parks there on scrantion, the bend and the lakefront, but given their history and current hopes that is not the best use of those spaces.

 

i would rather see smaller urban square style parks planned and incentivized a bit further out in midtown so they can be built around. there are some tabla rasas out there or almost, so best to plan ahead now. otherwise, it all gets eaten up piecemeal and by the opportunity corridor parkway.

This seems to be the prevailing mentality on this forum, and it doesn't make sense to me. A bunch of small parks can't replace a big park (and vice versa) even if they are of equal acreage. They serve different purposes, and the way people interact with them is wholly different. Big parks are destinations, people intentionally go to them to spend some time, small parks dispersed throughout the city allow everyone to integrate a bit of nature into their daily lives. 

 

Both of these things are important, but neither can replace the other. There's also no reason we can't have both. 

 

Also the best use of land is inherently subjective. I personally think Cleveland needs to take advantage of this regrowth opportunity to save (preferably waterfront) space for large downtown parks before that space is gobbled up for other uses.

A large park on the downtown lakefront would be nice.  Not just a big lawn, but one that offers many different attractions - concerts, festivals, gardens and recreational activities.  A couple ideas: restore Donald Gray Gardens; relocate Jacobs Pavilion as a classier concert/performance venue.

 

Here is some info on activities at Chicago's Grant Park:  

 

https://www.enjoyillinois.com/travel-illinois/guide-to-grant-park-chicagos-front-yard/

 

https://www.choosechicago.com/articles/parks-outdoors/explore-chicagos-grant-park/

 

 

Edited May 14, 20214 yr by skiwest

8 hours ago, mrnyc said:

sure you could fit parks there on scrantion, the bend and the lakefront, but given their history and current hopes that is not the best use of those spaces.

 

i would rather see smaller urban square style parks planned and incentivized a bit further out in midtown so they can be built around. there are some tabla rasas out there or almost, so best to plan ahead now. otherwise, it all gets eaten up piecemeal and by the opportunity corridor parkway.

 

Unfortunately I think we missed out on our once-in-a-lifetime chance at a nice urban park in Midtown with the demise of the planned Terdolph Park.

On 5/12/2021 at 11:43 AM, Ethan said:

This seems to be the prevailing mentality on this forum, and it doesn't make sense to me. A bunch of small parks can't replace a big park (and vice versa) even if they are of equal acreage. They serve different purposes, and the way people interact with them is wholly different. Big parks are destinations, people intentionally go to them to spend some time, small parks dispersed throughout the city allow everyone to integrate a bit of nature into their daily lives. 

 

Both of these things are important, but neither can replace the other. There's also no reason we can't have both. 

 

Also the best use of land is inherently subjective. I personally think Cleveland needs to take advantage of this regrowth opportunity to save (preferably waterfront) space for large downtown parks before that space is gobbled up for other uses.

 

 

hol' up -- don't the metroparks have 80 acres of all new waterfront park in mind between e55 and gordon park? and then there is the matter of connecting up the towpath and bringing along the cvsr. that along with public square, the malls, wendy park and edgewater improvements and the greater emerald necklace and cuyahoga valley? with all that i think cle is and will be doing just fine in the destination parks department.

 

i am more concerned about what i perceive from afar is not being done, which is planning for smaller urban square parks paired with developer incentives -- and doing the same around sites like erie cemetary and league park. pocket parks and neighborhood squares are very attractive too.

 

granted scranton and the bend and around the cuyahoga river are kind of a wildcard, but certainly given their history a mix of urban use is warranted there, rather than turning it all into outright parkland.

 

don't get me wrong, i would be happy for any and all park or other developments anywhere, but i just don't see cle as under-repped in that dept. in fact the plans for the towpath and eastern waterfront park seem the most well considered out of anything future oriented locally imo. maybe if they get rid of burke someday it could be made a big park -- its infill and not really able to be built up on.

On 5/7/2021 at 8:52 PM, X said:

I'm not sure that "big" is what we really need in a park Downtown.  I think having a smart mix of passive and active uses and programming, supportive surrounding land uses, and proper maintenance are all more important than making a "big" park space.

Proper maintenance = the City of Cleveland cannot be in charge.   They struggle to maintain their current assignments.  Any future parks need to be put under the stewardship of the Metroparks.