27 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Yep, sort of like "action item" means task.

At my previous place of employment, they like to use the term "deliverable".

10 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

Is everyone here just older than me and sick of seeing these plans? Frankly I’m really optimistic about this.
 

Taking into account what we’ve seen happen in the flats, at Edgewater, Voinovich park, and Cleveland Lakefront Nature Preserve over the past decade I’m expecting big changes over the next ten years as well.  

11 hours ago, Henke said:

Is everyone here just older than me and sick of seeing these plans? Frankly I’m really optimistic about this.
 

Taking into account what we’ve seen happen in the flats, at Edgewater, Voinovich park, and Cleveland Lakefront Nature Preserve over the past decade I’m expecting big changes over the next ten years as well.  

 

I think it's just big time "boy who cried wolf" vibes. How many times have we heard similar things over and over again and nothing ever materializes. So I think many people are in a "believe it when they see it" thought process and I think that is 100% justified way of thinking. 

 

Nevertheless you can still be optimistic maybe this is the time it works!

Having a young, energetic mayor is reason to be a little more optimistic about something finally happening.

1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Having a young, energetic mayor is reason to be a little more optimistic about something finally happening.

Bingo

You guys have convinced me. I WON'T be cynical on this latest plan... or at least will make every effort not to. God I want the lake and river to be legit attractions. It's just absolute maddening, and we're all ten years older than ten years ago. 

 

When you read lakefront development articles from the 60s and 70s that mirror these discussions, and now all those posters and planners are geriatrics or dead, damn, change is slow, life is fast. How the f did we build things so quickly once upon a time. 

 

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by TBideon

To be perfectly honest, this current attempt at lakefront planning has me really confused.  I don't quite understand who is leading the charge and who is/will be responsible for it implementation.  

 

A while back it was the Haslams, I guess in conjunction with the city and county and maybe various other agencies.  I believe the city committed 5 million (and maybe other entities contributed more) for an 18 months worth of studies (engineering and the like) as a preliminary step for many purposes, including passing various regulatory agencies in the future.  Many pretty conceptual pictures were presented at that time over which we all wet our pants.  I imagine this work is still on going.

 

Then we have the Rock and Roll Hall of fame expansion which seems to be some what related but on hold due to all of the above I guess.  I assume Rock Hall officials are coordinating with XY and Z in government who ever they are-or maybe not.

 

Then all of a sudden we get some sort of $500,000 study from the new administration (which is basically peanuts...what can you study for that amount of money?) which is suppose to expand the study area and incorporate  it into the master plan what ever that means.  Of course this means transparency  and community input  so that down the line, at some board approval meeting, this can all be touted.  Basically it will consist of a vague presentation and happy talk and then a  bunch of "regular people" with no expertise but too much time on their hands offering their visions which of course will eventually be ignored.  I am still not sure how this new insipid study will be incorporated into what I will call the Haslam  work.

 

Finally who exactly is the lakefront czar.  Who  is leading the charge?  Are a bunch of different people and bodies responsible for this development?  If yes, a recipe for disaster and exploding costs (just look at the jail mess).

 

Finally when can I see some new pretty pictures so we can haggle over them until the new lakefront plan is proposed in 5 years.

 

 

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by Htsguy

33 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Then we have the Rock and Roll Hall of fame expansion which seems to be some what related but on hold due to all of the above I guess. 

 

wait that's on hold now? bummer to hear. I was excited they were expanding that.

Just now, dwolfi01 said:

 

wait that's on hold now? bummer to hear. I was excited they were expanding that.

I really don't know one way or another...however you don't see any movement and it would make sense given all the confusion as to what will be surrounding it.  Does anybody know the status?

I didn't care for the renderings of the Rock Hall expansion.  I'm glad it's on hold.  

 

1 hour ago, Htsguy said:

To be perfectly honest, this current attempt at lakefront planning has me really confused.  I don't quite understand who is leading the charge and who is/will be responsible for it implementation.  

 

3 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Having a young, energetic mayor is reason to be a little more optimistic about something finally happening.

 

He may be young and energetic, but from what I've been hearing from different sources, he doesn't really understand development and how it happens. And his chief urban planner is like 30 years old so likely doesn't know either, though I haven't heard her speak publicly about anything. Maybe he keeps the muzzle on her or maybe they have nothing to say. I have zero hope that he or his administration can get this done, especially done right. I heard one of his first official acts was to disrupt development by reducing development incentives by reducing property tax abatements. Maybe city council will step up and lead the charge? Do they have that authority?

 

 

Point taken.  Cleveland had a young and energetic mayor in the 70s.  How did that turn out?  

How about we don't make this thread about politics or it gets locked?

There are lots of parties involved - ODOT, Amtrak, FAA, Rock Hall, Science Center, Haslam/Browns, Army Corps of Engineers and probably a few more.  So yes, @Htsguy it could be a recipe for disaster.

 

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by LibertyBlvd

3 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

There are lots of parties involved - ODOT, Amtrak, FAA, Rock Hall, Science Center, Haslam/Browns, and probably a few more.  So yes, @Htsguy it could be a recipe for disaster.

 

 

13 minutes ago, X said:

How about we don't make this thread about politics or it gets locked?

 

Politics (and all the inter-agency politics) plays a tremendous role in getting something like the lakefront built. If we can't talk about the politics around it, we may as well not even have this thread at all.

 

Maybe @KJP can bring us up to date or explain the current process and players (Sorry Ken...I am sure you have a lot on your plate).  

 

I was being totally honest when I offered that I am totally confused by what is going on and who is supposedly in charge of lakefront development.  Embarrassing as I really try to follow these things.  I understand that there are probably a multiplicity of people and agencies with their fingers in the mix (the administration including the staff at city planning, City Council, NOACA,  Planning Commission, ODOT, Cuyahoga County, the Port, the FAA, Haslams, mabye the State of Ohio, perhaps some foundations and other governmental boards), but there has to be somebody responsible for the ultimate vision and moving things forward.

^The city owns the land. It should be the city.

@Ethan--what's with the downvote---you'd rather have no thread at all about the lakefront? Why not? Or a thread without a discussion on how it gets done--just pretty pictures?

I would bet to say the haslem’s maybe not leading the charge but pushing the charge, they’re the only ones with a real deadline of their lease ending

Hey every one, the mods, at least the Cleveland mods, are pretty quick to shut a thread down when posters start calling each other out so.... I really don't want this thread shut down.  At least not until somebody offers to take me to lunch and answer all my questions. 😉

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by Htsguy

Cleveland, and really the state of Ohio could really have benefitted from regulatory body to ensure that development adheres to certain principles. The historical bad decisions in Ohio and lack of coherent planning has really ruined most of the shoreline or at least kept it inaccessible. Until there's more concrete framework in place I'm afraid the future and shape of a large portion of the Lakefront is simply dependent on whatever some developer can get away with. 

 

In California the Coastal Commission exists to provide a well-established set of guidelines for developers and government agencies to adhere to. It's maybe too late for Ohio, but until these shiny Lakefront plans have some regulatory teeth it's going to be extremely difficult and not to mention time consuming to get all stakeholders on the same page. 

 

https://www.coastal.ca.gov/whoweare.html

 

The Coastal Act includes specific policies  that address issues such as shoreline public access and recreation, lower cost visitor accommodations, terrestrial and marine habitat protection, visual resources, landform alteration, agricultural lands, commercial fisheries, industrial uses, water quality, offshore oil and gas development, transportation, development design, power plants, ports, and public works. The policies of the Coastal Act constitute the statutory standards applied to planning and regulatory decisions made by the Commission and by local governments, pursuant to the Coastal Act.

 

The Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial state agency. The Commission is composed of twelve voting members, appointed equally (four each) by the Governor, the Senate Rules Committee, and the Speaker of the Assembly. Six of the voting commissioners are locally elected officials and six are appointed from the public at large. Three ex officio (non-voting) members represent the Resources Agency, the California State Transportation Agency, and the State Lands Commission.

9 minutes ago, surfohio said:

Cleveland, and really the state of Ohio could really have benefitted from regulatory body to ensure that development adheres to certain principles. The historical bad decisions in Ohio and lack of coherent planning has really ruined most of the shoreline or at least kept it inaccessible. Until there's more concrete framework in place I'm afraid the future and shape of a large portion of the Lakefront is simply dependent on whatever some developer can get away with. 

 

In California the Coastal Commission exists to provide a well-established set of guidelines for developers and government agencies to adhere to. It's maybe too late for Ohio, but until these shiny Lakefront plans have some regulatory teeth it's going to be extremely difficult and not to mention time consuming to get all stakeholders on the same page. 

 

https://www.coastal.ca.gov/whoweare.html

 

The Coastal Act includes specific policies  that address issues such as shoreline public access and recreation, lower cost visitor accommodations, terrestrial and marine habitat protection, visual resources, landform alteration, agricultural lands, commercial fisheries, industrial uses, water quality, offshore oil and gas development, transportation, development design, power plants, ports, and public works. The policies of the Coastal Act constitute the statutory standards applied to planning and regulatory decisions made by the Commission and by local governments, pursuant to the Coastal Act.

 

The Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial state agency. The Commission is composed of twelve voting members, appointed equally (four each) by the Governor, the Senate Rules Committee, and the Speaker of the Assembly. Six of the voting commissioners are locally elected officials and six are appointed from the public at large. Three ex officio (non-voting) members represent the Resources Agency, the California State Transportation Agency, and the State Lands Commission.

 

The point is well taken, but isn't the downtown coastline and area under consideration of these plans one of the few areas that is under public control to direct development? Or am I mistaken? 

2 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

The point is well taken, but isn't the downtown coastline and area under consideration of these plans one of the few areas that is under public control to direct development? Or am I mistaken? 

 

Undoubtedly there is an element of "public" control, but I'm not sure anyone really knows what that means in practice. Aside from the height restrictions with Burke, anything can happen down there. It could very well be another Flats East Bank type of situation where a single developer's vision is given a green light for the sake of development.  

@Htsguy Legally, the city determines land use and is therefore the final determinant of what happens along the lakefront and into the water for a short bit. So the city has to be the lead sponsor of all the studies and plans that happen.

 

But let's be honest. Governments don't do anything new/different from the status unless someone or many someones with political influence give a government a good reason to get out of its rut.

 

The Haslems are the ones that got the study/planning for the landbridge to move forward with the involvement of NOACA and ODOT. 

 

The Metroparks and the Green Ribbon Coalition got things moving forward on the CHEERS study.

 

I don't who got things moving forward on the Burke Airport study, or the comprehensive study incorporating all facets of the above, but the city is the lead sponsor.

8 minutes ago, KJP said:

@Htsguy Legally, the city determines land use and is therefore the final determinant of what happens along the lakefront and into the water for a short bit. So the city has to be the lead sponsor of all the studies and plans that happen.

 

But let's be honest. Governments don't do anything new/different from the status unless someone or many someones with political influence give a government a good reason to get out of its rut.

 

The Haslems are the ones that got the study/planning for the landbridge to move forward with the involvement of NOACA and ODOT. 

 

The Metroparks and the Green Ribbon Coalition got things moving forward on the CHEERS study.

 

I don't who got things moving forward on the Burke Airport study, or the comprehensive study incorporating all facets of the above, but the city is the lead sponsor.

Thanks Ken.  So would you say when push comes to shove it is the City Planning Dept. staff that is "coordinating" all of this?  I mean one entity has to be responsible for pulling all this together and directing things or it is just a mess.

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by Htsguy

2 hours ago, jcw92 said:

 

 

Politics (and all the inter-agency politics) plays a tremendous role in getting something like the lakefront built. If we can't talk about the politics around it, we may as well not even have this thread at all.

 

 

Sure.  But keep it TIGHTLY tied to the Lakefront (as some people already weren't), or it gets the axe.  Simple enough?

 

16 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Thanks Ken.  So would you say when push comes to shove it is the City Planning Dept. staff that is "coordinating" all of this?  I mean one entity has to be responsible for pulling all this together and directing things or it is just a mess.

 

The city planning staff is develops and enforces standards. 

 

Cleveland has issued RFP's for private development in the past and the results are that developers come back with requirements that exceed the city's budget.

 

Until the City can raise more money by convincing additional government entities to subsidize private development they're probably wasting their time.

2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

Thanks Ken.  So would you say when push comes to shove it is the City Planning Dept. staff that is "coordinating" all of this?  I mean one entity has to be responsible for pulling all this together and directing things or it is just a mess.

 

It's the City Planning Commission, yes, with assists from the Economic Development and Community Development departments plus, unfortunately, Public Works (city traffic engineers, argh!).

9 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

It's the City Planning Commission, yes, with assists from the Economic Development and Community Development departments plus, unfortunately, Public Works (city traffic engineers, argh!).

Did you mean to write City Planning Department?

Same thing.

16 minutes ago, KJP said:

Same thing.

I always thought of the Planning Department as the worker bees administrative department with day to day duties and the Planning Commission as  more of a part time, quasi legislative body, although a part of the administration.  Given how clueless various Planning Commission members often appear as they review development projects I hope that is the case.

 

16 minutes ago, KJP said:

Same thing.

 

Edited October 27, 20222 yr by Htsguy

Except the staff, led by the planning director, works for the commissioners. The mayor recommends hiring the director and the commissioners accept or reject the recommendation.

This Fridays Planning Commission meeting is pretty light but there will be a "special presentation" which is entitled "North Coast Lakefront Update" with the Cleveland Planning Director as one of three presenters.   Maybe we will get some concrete information which would be nice.  Or maybe we will just get a lot more cheer leading and "we cannot answer that question at this time" which would not be so nice.

On 10/7/2022 at 12:12 PM, BoomerangCleRes said:

Timeline around the proposal process mentioned in the Steven lift article above

Joyce mentioned the haslem plan is just 1 of 20 plans being included in the total master plan

Maybe they’ve got a couple proposals they like to share 

Unfortunately their presentation was not in the package of presentations sent out to the media.

On 10/27/2022 at 8:48 PM, KJP said:

Except the staff, led by the planning director, works for the commissioners. The mayor recommends hiring the director and the commissioners accept or reject the recommendation.

 

Note:  Bratenahl is not part of Cleveland.

Edited October 31, 20222 yr by E Rocc

Another Study. https://fox8.com/news/future-of-burke-lakefront-close-it-or-keep-it/

15 minutes ago, simplythis said:

Another Study. https://fox8.com/news/future-of-burke-lakefront-close-it-or-keep-it/

 

Is the consultant only going to compare alternatives to Burke Airport "as is?" 

 

I don't think it's possible to get a clear picture unless you also factor in the potential for it to become a better airport. 

Mayor Bibb’s Town Hall is tonight from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m.

 

https://clevelandnorthcoast.com/

 

 

1 hour ago, surfohio said:

 

Is the consultant only going to compare alternatives to Burke Airport "as is?" 

 

I don't think it's possible to get a clear picture unless you also factor in the potential for it to become a better airport. 

Better airport meaning what - a few flights to Detroit or Cincy?  I think more pressing need is for CLE to become a better airport.

 

15 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Better airport meaning what - a few flights to Detroit or Cincy?  I think more pressing need is for CLE to become a better airport.

 

 

Meaning this. Like is this feasible?

 

https://www.vaakins.com/burke-lakefront-master-plan

 

Working in partnership with EE&K a Perkins Eastman company, VAA developed a redevelopment plan for the Burke Lakefront Airport site. This plan involved restoring the terminal and restaurant, as well as developing a new high-tech waterfront office park, hangar, and parking garages. The office park was designed to consist of four main buildings and floating offices on the lake. The schedule for this project was designed to occur in either four phases: constructing one building in each phase, or all at once.

Edited November 3, 20222 yr by surfohio

^ So Burke remains as an airport with an office park on the west side of the property?  Is the land suitable for buildings of that size?  And would the FAA be OK with all those buildings so close to the runway?

This was seventeen lakefront plans ago, but check this:

 

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2012/03/cleveland_council_oks_lakefron.html

Every lakefront plan always seems to have Burke remaining as an airport.  Has there even been a lakefront plan without the Burke property as an airport?

Who all is going to the meeting tonight? 

I would like to see political pressure on Ohio's congressional delegation to move the Coast Guard station.  That piece of land is more suited to develop (location-wise, being on the edge of downtown and across from the Rock Hall), than other parts of the waterfront, including Burke.  

Live form the belly of the beast. 

Edited November 3, 20222 yr by TotalTransit

1 hour ago, ryanfrazier said:

I would like to see political pressure on Ohio's congressional delegation to move the Coast Guard station.  That piece of land is more suited to develop (location-wise, being on the edge of downtown and across from the Rock Hall), than other parts of the waterfront, including Burke.  

 

I'd like that, too.  But they just built a new building down there, so I think its unlikely they'll move soon.

3 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Better airport meaning what - a few flights to Detroit or Cincy?  I think more pressing need is for CLE to become a better airport.

 

I see it as a better airport if the city actually uses it to generate economic activity in the city of Cleveland.   

 

Flexjet is building their worldwide HQ at CGF and I guarantee you no one from the city of Cleveland even bothered to call them to try to move them downtown.   That would have generated a huge amount of interest by other aviation businesses in looking at BKL.