Some kind of lakefront announcement by the mayor tomorrow at 3. Also, worth a listen between the mayor and county exec during this forum hosted by Litt.

 

Edited July 26, 20231 yr by nokoeeee

17 minutes ago, nokoeeee said:

Some kind of lakefront announcement by the mayor tomorrow at 3. Also, worth a listen between the mayor and county exec during this forum hosted by Litt.

 

Haven't we known that for more than a week now.  In fact didn't @KJP write a NeoTran article about this July 27 announcement sometime last week?

Edited July 26, 20231 yr by Htsguy

On 7/18/2023 at 5:02 PM, KJP said:

 

Lakefront vision to be unveiled July 27
By Ken Prendergast / July 18, 2023

 

Although the downtown lakefront plans to be released publicly on July 27 will be preliminary, they will give more insight into the direction city officials received from prior public input sessions on developing the city’s “front porch” as officials call the city’s Lake Erie waterfront. And since these plans are still preliminary and conceptual, city officials said they want more public input on them before refining them and adding more design details to them.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2023/07/18/lakefront-vision-to-be-unveiled-july-27/

Is this meeting being live streamed in any capacity? 

16 minutes ago, Ethan said:

Is this meeting being live streamed in any capacity? 

 

Is that... 

 

Let the bombs begin dropping….

Cleveland wants feedback on downtown lakefront draft plan that includes beach, ‘land bridge’ with a graceful curve & more

Steven Litt - July 27, 3023 - Cleveland.com *Subscriber Exclusive*

 

"The 21.6-acre development area north of the stadium could accommodate 600 to 1,000 residential units built atop active ground floor uses or parking, the plans show. There’s also room for 200,000 to 400,000 square feet of office or commercial space, a 200-room hotel rising 8 to 12 stories, plus 40,000 to 80,000 square feet of retail, including ground floor spaces tucked under the land bridge. Another 25,000 square feet could accommodate a food hall, market or entertainment spaces, or a community center. ... The plans indicated that a multi-modal transit hub for Amtrak trains and the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority could be tucked under the land bridge, next to the Shoreway."

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, NorthShore647 said:

Cleveland wants feedback on downtown lakefront draft plan that includes beach, ‘land bridge’ with a graceful curve & more

Steven Litt - July 27, 3023 - Cleveland.com *Subscriber Exclusive*

 

"The 21.6-acre development area north of the stadium could accommodate 600 to 1,000 residential units built atop active ground floor uses or parking, the plans show. There’s also room for 200,000 to 400,000 square feet of office or commercial space, a 200-room hotel rising 8 to 12 stories, plus 40,000 to 80,000 square feet of retail, including ground floor spaces tucked under the land bridge. Another 25,000 square feet could accommodate a food hall, market or entertainment spaces, or a community center. ... The plans indicated that a multi-modal transit hub for Amtrak trains and the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority could be tucked under the land bridge, next to the Shoreway."

 

 

 

 

 

Since the article is a subscriber exclusive, could you please provide the hyper link to the survey/feedback? 

4 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

Since the article is a subscriber exclusive, could you please provide the hyper link to the survey/feedback? 

 

Just had a link to the existing website: https://clevelandnorthcoast.com/

 

*Edit* There will be a new survey, and more public meetings in the fall.

 

4 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

Since the article is a subscriber exclusive, could you please provide the hyper link to the survey/feedback? 

The Litt article is labeled 'subscriber exclusive' but I was still able to open and read in full, so maybe give it a try 🤷‍♂️

The new building development sure is significantly reduced.  And do we really need Public Square, the Mall and Edgewater Beach duplicated over here?

Edited July 27, 20231 yr by Firenze98

Is that a roof on the stadium?!? Or a highly misleading 3d box?

The bridge concept looks fantastic. But the "swooping" promenade north of the stadium looks like it will severely limit mixed use possibility. Like there is an allergy against right angles and urban street grid.

23 minutes ago, brownsfan1226 said:

Is that a roof on the stadium?!? Or a highly misleading 3d box?

 

Just "Cleveland Browns Future Stadium Renovation"

 

Nothing particular about the stadium outside of a "Stadium Plaza" at the Land Bridge Level connecting to the structure bridging over Erieside. A plaza there could require a large renovation of the East Endzone / Dawg Pound Structure (which was largely rebuilt in the 2014 renovation) if it would presumably include a new entrance gate. If this version is built (or any that connects to the East Endzone structure) an entrance gate to the stadium there could easily be the busiest on gamedays. 

8 minutes ago, brownsfan1226 said:

Is that a roof on the stadium?!? Or a highly misleading 3d box?

It is probably just a placeholder

Lots of hardscapes, not very green. Pretty sharp turn before the landing for bikers. Don’t love the sports courts being there, seem out of place but I’d use them if they were there. Interested to see what type of bridge it would be. I feel like this bridge would really pop if it was designed a suspension bridge some like in Dublin, Ohio on a bigger scale or something similar to what was the initial design of the lake link trail, guessing the cost on that would be astronomical but a great opportunity to do something special other than a glorified concrete highway bridge 

I like the idea of the Bluffs park and the bridge is becoming refined in a positive way.  I think the bridge should be as slender as they can make it.  one critique is I think the beach concept is misguided. its trying to cram a little bit of everyone's ideas into one project, but it won't be large enough to really work.  I'd like to see  some large shade trees and landscaping that is less ornamental. 

 

This would really work well too if they were anchored by another family-friendly museum/entertainment-type thing there.  bummer the aquarium is across the river

Edited July 27, 20231 yr by Whipjacka

I applaud Bibb's attention to the lakefront but is it necessary to get more public imput to come up with a plan? Don't we already have a plan and if not that one there's plenty of others gathering dust in various storage facilities. 

 

The single best place you start is with the landbridge. Once that's in place everything else can follow. Just focus on getting the funding for it. What happens next will be determined by what happens with the stadium. After that decision we can fill in the rest.

 

I'm afraid if we dither any more on grand lakefront dreams that's all we'll have, ie. dreams.

1 minute ago, Whipjacka said:

 I'd like to see  some large shade trees and landscaping that is less ornamental. 

Agreed, we are the forest city after all!

4 minutes ago, cadmen said:

I applaud Bibb's attention to the lakefront but is it necessary to get more public imput to come up with a plan? Don't we already have a plan and if not that one there's plenty of others gathering dust in various storage facilities. 

 

The single best place you start is with the landbridge. Once that's in place everything else can follow. Just focus on getting the funding for it. What happens next will be determined by what happens with the stadium. After that decision we can fill in the rest.

 

I'm afraid if we dither any more on grand lakefront dreams that's all we'll have, ie. dreams.

 

I have similar concerns. The Land Bridge is by far the most important part. There does however seem to be a more concrete roadmap to this iteration. 

 

From the Litt article: "The city’s goal now for the land bridge is to bring the new plans to 30% completion by the end of the year, making it possible to calculate costs and begin seeking federal infrastructure grants through sources including the five-year, $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill signed into law by President Biden in 2021."

Another public input study? Like @cadmen said, you got a ton of good public feedback, just come up with the damn plan already!

I have to study everything a bit more later, so I don't have an immediate reaction. But I do have an immediate question: This entire plan/layout is being thought of and built around the Browns stadium, so what if the stadium moves? Is demolished? What do they do with that massive plot of land then? 

I think part of it of cramming everything into one design is to gather feedback on all of the pieces individually, so the stuff that's really important to everyone floats to the top and they can cut the rest but no one will accuse them of ignoring or not thinking of things.

I like the plan overall. I enjoy the wide mix of uses, and my initial impression is that it's well balanced. I'd personally like the land bridge to be a bit wider, and I have a few other minor critiques, but more than anything else, I'd just like something to get built. 

 

Does anyone have the presentation? 

Is it me or are some of the concepts sort of pedestrian for a site that really should be a Cleveland show piece.  I mean a "cookout grove" and basketball courts.  Those are great but better suited for more of a neighborhood park or someplace like Irishtown Bend park,  especially given the really limited space.

I as well roll my eyes at all this "public input", but I believe it has been suggested in the past that it is required as part of the process to secure federal funds.

I can’t believe what I’m seeing here. Two items I’ve been harping about here and across the socials have appeared in this.

 

1. green roof parks on top of the city and county garages, connecting the East 9th corridor through Willard Park and the West 3rd corridor through Huntington Park, helping stitch more of downtown to the land bridge.

2. THE BEACH!!!  Downtown desperately needs a beach. What bigger attraction do you need? That alone will draw thousands daily to the lakefront all summer. 

9 minutes ago, marty15 said:

green roof parks on top of the city and county garages, connecting the East 9th corridor through Willard Park and the West 3rd corridor through Huntington Park, helping stitch more of downtown to the land bridge.

!! I've been asking for this as well! Maybe they actually read my post it note at the listening session! I didn't even notice this during the presentation.

17 minutes ago, marty15 said:

 

2. THE BEACH!!!  Downtown desperately needs a beach. What bigger attraction do you need? That alone will draw thousands daily to the lakefront all summer. 

 

Just to clarify, when when people say a beach do you mean a sandy area like sugar beach in Toronto? Other wise a real beach might be kind of odd in a harbor, is there examples of this?

8 minutes ago, Ethan said:

!! I've been asking for this as well! Maybe they actually read my post it note at the listening session! I didn't even notice this during the presentation.

There’s a lot I don’t like about the render, but I’m just gonna shut up and be happy. There’s definitely progress going on. IMO, after the land bridge, the beach should be priority #1. That will draw more people than the stadium by multiples.

 

I also think now, the new justice center tower could be considered to go up adjacent to the land bridge. 

I've said it upthread, but there is like little to no water movement in this neck of the harbor. It's not difficult to bike out to where the beach is supposed to go and you might have second thoughts. 

7 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

Just to clarify, when when people say a beach do you mean a sandy area like sugar beach in Toronto? Other wise a real beach might be kind of odd in a harbor, is there examples of this?

There’s a city in Michigan, literally called harbor beach, with multiple beaches inside its breakwall. Probably would cut down on erosion. Also, Wendy Park has a small natural beach strip inside the breakwall. That one would be easy to develop if they wanted to.

6 minutes ago, GISguy said:

I've said it upthread, but there is like little to no water movement in this neck of the harbor. It's not difficult to bike out to where the beach is supposed to go and you might have second thoughts. 

There’s literally no water movement at the beach in Key West either, because of the reef. Or natural sand, it’s all trucked in. But hordes of people go there. Most people don’t even go in the water at beaches, from my observation. Mostly laying out and doing beach activities. 

I’m skeptical that 600-1000 new residential units is enough to support that retail, but maybe the area will become enough of a destination itself. 
 

Did we get any updates on the status of the Shoreway?

 

I was torn at first, but it's really growing on me. I like how there is still an area for development that could be a great sports district, but it's somewhat separate from the park. I think the pieces are all here. Just needs to be properly executed.

 

I would like to see more green on the land bridge though. Could give it vibes similar to New York's Skyline. 

Maybe because i don't currently live in NEO, I've lost track of the discussion. Why do we choose to have a massive stadium on a prime lakefront spot other than it's already there and there are major cost savings associated with infrastructure, remodeling, etc. . Are UO's in agreement on this or are we split down the ragged middle? 

1 minute ago, DO_Summers said:

Maybe because i don't currently live in NEO, I've lost track of the discussion. Why do we choose to have a massive stadium on a prime lakefront spot other than it's already there and there are major cost savings associated with infrastructure, remodeling, etc. . Are UO's in agreement on this or are we split down the ragged middle? 

The consensus seems to be; renovation at existing site for a fraction of new is totally fine. If it’s built somewhere off the lakefront, by whatever means, even better. At least that’s where I’m at. 

I also believe the cruise ship terminal should be where the Mather is. I hope everyone is suggesting that as well.  They can park the Mather over by the USS Cod. People can tour both at the same stop. Of course, after the Metroparks removes the Leandog boat. 

Overall plan layout looks good but it needs more residential and removal of the sports courts (these don't need to be on prime lakefront property). A larger residential population will be needed for the "critical mass" effect to sustain activity/ business during down times (essentially any day that's not a summer weekend or sporting event). 

A "beach" in the spot depicted is not optimal. In my experience there's 1. not enough water movement (because of the breakwall) so there's constant water quality issues and 2. the area is non-natural landfill, so we're talking a real feat of engineering to naturalize a shoreline, which I've never seen accomplished before.   

17 minutes ago, marty15 said:

I also believe the cruise ship terminal should be where the Mather is. I hope everyone is suggesting that as well.  They can park the Mather over by the USS Cod. People can tour both at the same stop. Of course, after the Metroparks removes the Leandog boat. 

They definitely need to move the Mather. It is taking up way too much space and is obstructing lake views.  Perhaps a more suitable place for it would be somewhere in the Flats. It would just require cutting a 600' channel off the river so it doesn't interfere with navigation.

 

Edited July 27, 20231 yr by LibertyBlvd

21 minutes ago, marty15 said:

I also believe the cruise ship terminal should be where the Mather is. I hope everyone is suggesting that as well.  They can park the Mather over by the USS Cod. People can tour both at the same stop. Of course, after the Metroparks removes the Leandog boat. 

It looks like they have a cruise ship terminal on the west side of this space. That seems fine to me. 

This picture makes me hesitant on such a heavy focus on a beach area. I feel that in the winter that it will be dead unless the winter programming is stellar.

I would like to see a mid rise buildings with multipurpose uses at the bottom on the empty lot around the stadium with a building similar to the building on Chicago's Navy Pier in the middle. (It is one larger building that contains souvenir shops and restaurants.) That building could be used year round and have souvenirs for the Mather, Great Lakes Science Center, Rock Hall etc. The building would open up to a board walk similar in design to the Flats East Bank that could *potentially* open up to the waterfront depending on space

As far as the side that faces the Mather ship, It could contain the outdoor uses/a pocket park with seating etc.

(The Ferris wheel would be a bonus lol).

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

40 minutes ago, surfohio said:

A "beach" in the spot depicted is not optimal. In my experience there's 1. not enough water movement (because of the breakwall) so there's constant water quality issues and 2. the area is non-natural landfill, so we're talking a real feat of engineering to naturalize a shoreline, which I've never seen accomplished before.   

 

/

This concept makes me think the stadium needs to go elsewhere and it should be replaced by more housing and retail then surrounded by a park like rendered. 

 

4 hours ago, Luke_S said:

 

Since the article is a subscriber exclusive, could you please provide the hyper link to the survey/feedback? 

Love that cleveland dot com puts an article about a public project that is seeking public input (which they chose to title, "Cleveland wants feedback...") behind a paywall....

Anyone know if the reason the design team opted for a park rather than even a low-rise mixed use development is due to projected costs of building on North Coast Harbor because it's fill? 

Just now, Luke_S said:

Anyone know if the reason the design team opted for a park rather than even a low-rise mixed use development is due to projected costs of building on North Coast Harbor because its fill? 

Was that a factor in the cost of building Browns stadium? I have always felt the fill considerations are overblown but that’s primarily coming from a place of emotion since I’m not an engineer haha