August 14, 20231 yr 16 hours ago, sonisharri said: Seems like an awfully large amount of surface parking I think part of that is to illustrate boat trailers parking. I know this is a long way off, but it would be nice to add some sort of barrier to block some the noise from 90. It would add a lot to this space even now. This lakefront area is still a nice place to go and sit and fish but the highway noise is obnoxious. Seems like there is something that could be done to make it less oppresive.
August 14, 20231 yr 34 minutes ago, coneflower said: I think part of that is to illustrate boat trailers parking. I know this is a long way off, but it would be nice to add some sort of barrier to block some the noise from 90. It would add a lot to this space even now. This lakefront area is still a nice place to go and sit and fish but the highway noise is obnoxious. Seems like there is something that could be done to make it less oppresive. If it's any consolation I'm betting that in 30 years vehicles will be quieter.
August 14, 20231 yr 53 minutes ago, coneflower said: I think part of that is to illustrate boat trailers parking. I know this is a long way off, but it would be nice to add some sort of barrier to block some the noise from 90. It would add a lot to this space even now. This lakefront area is still a nice place to go and sit and fish but the highway noise is obnoxious. Seems like there is something that could be done to make it less oppresive. Or... Opt for the Green Ribbon Coalition's proposal and move the highway south uniting Gordon park. On 7/13/2023 at 9:54 AM, Ethan said: Is there any remaining momentum, any at all, for the Green Ribbon Coalition's proposal? https://www.greenribbonlakefront.org/projects/gordonpark/ Edit: Further edit: If this was ever done this Park would be larger than edgewater without even considering the nature preserve.
August 14, 20231 yr 17 hours ago, sonisharri said: Seems like an awfully large amount of surface parking Have u seen the Edgewater lot on a nice day?
August 14, 20231 yr 6 minutes ago, Ethan said: Or... Opt for the Green Ribbon Coalition's proposal and move the highway south uniting Gordon park. I really do like the idea of this island thingy, but doing all this work without moving 90 seems like a giant waste.
August 14, 20231 yr 17 minutes ago, Ineffable_Matt said: I really do like the idea of this island thingy, but doing all this work without moving 90 seems like a giant waste. While agreed it would be nice, it would add another decade to the project. Also nothing about this precludes that from happening.
August 14, 20231 yr 33 minutes ago, Ineffable_Matt said: I really do like the idea of this island thingy, but doing all this work without moving 90 seems like a giant waste. I wouldn't go so far as a waste, but it's certainly a missed opportunity. As @ASP1984says it can always be done later. I just hope people don't look at the Cheers project and say "good enough, no need to move the highway." The combination of Cheers and the Green Ribbon Coalition's proposal would be a truly fantastic lakefront park, probably better than Edgewater.
August 14, 20231 yr That’s the thing, I fear they would pat themselves on the back and never touch 90. Still a cool project, though.
August 14, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, Ineffable_Matt said: That’s the thing, I fear they would pat themselves on the back and never touch 90. Still a cool project, though. I thought the driving purpose of this was to avoid moving the Shoreway? To move the crashing waves away from the freeway. No?
August 14, 20231 yr 24 minutes ago, marty15 said: I thought the driving purpose of this was to avoid moving the Shoreway? To move the crashing waves away from the freeway. No? It is, I'm pretty sure that to the powers that be insulating the highway from the waves is far and away the primary purpose of this project, building the park is merely a secondary benefit. Now, to me, and I assume @Ineffable_Matt, the park is the primary benefit. The highway should never have been built there in the first place.
August 16, 20231 yr The Metroparks are commiting to putting $2,800,000 for the Cheers project as part of a 20% local match portion of the funding.
September 13, 20231 yr R&R Hall of Fame news. https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/multimillion-dollar-rock-roll-hall-of-fame-expansion-and-upgrades-to-begin-in-october
September 15, 20231 yr I just posted this in the Browns Stadium thread, but it probably belongs here... I think the Lakefront and Riverfront are interesting comparisons. They are two waterfront properties of somewhat relatively similar size and adjacent to downtown. They are both largely cutoff from downtown, have huge infrastructure hurdles to development, and have been discussed and masterplanned for decades with no results. They both have major stakeholders with deep pockets. That said, both are approaching development in completely different ways. The prevailing approach to the Lakefront has been "...if only these major infrastructure hurdles could be fixed, there's no doubt that large scale, first class would surely follow" ...it seems they are waiting for the bureaucrats to take the lead. Meanwhile on the Riverfront, the prevailing approach appears to be "...we're bringing large scale, first class development to this site. Once we have the projects tee'd up, we'll tell you what we need to make it happen"...it seems like developers are taking the lead here. It's kind of a chicken and egg thing and it will be interesting to see which approach will result in development and investment.
September 21, 20231 yr Hadn’t seen this posted anywhere else yet. Apologies if I’ve missed the discussion elsewhere. Cleveland eyes broad funding plan to help remake waterfront along Cuyahoga River, Lake Erie
October 20, 20231 yr The 60% Plans are out and boy are they beautiful!!! https://www.cleveland.com/news/2023/10/60-complete-cleveland-downtown-lakefront-plan-calls-for-affordable-fun-scaled-down-shoreway-eventual-move-for-browns-tailgaters.html No need to write home to just yet, but in the renderings Cleveland Browns Stadium is incased in (in my *professional* experience), a brand-spankin new facade and concourse expansion! Edited October 20, 20231 yr by Geowizical
October 20, 20231 yr The plan looks good. My only concern is that the land bridge appears to have gotten more narrow. As far as constructing a land bridge, I would encourage Cleveland leaders to take a look at the Presidio Tunnel Top park in San Francisco. Planners there built an extension of the Presidio over Highway 101 leading to and from the GG Bridge and topped it with an incredible park. It’s a beautiful, functional space.
October 20, 20231 yr Looks like some more thought has been put to this, but I still would like to see a larger residential component or this area is going to be underutilized throughout much of the year. Why not pursue highrise residential buildings instead of the midrises that are shown?
October 20, 20231 yr Looks like some more thought has been put to this, but I still would like to see a larger residential component or this area is going to be underutilized throughout much of the year. Why not pursue highrise residential buildings instead of the midrises that are shown? Same thing as always. Burke flight paths. Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk
October 20, 20231 yr I’d be just fine with something on the scale of Lakewood’s Gold Coast - the good life 24/7 for new downtown residents with ocean-like and (for higher floors, at least) skyline views - Add a boardwalk along the way for everyone to enjoy - don’t let Burke be a reason to limit our potential. North Coast baby! Edited October 20, 20231 yr by CleveFan
October 20, 20231 yr I think i know the answer, but why call it a Homeland Security terminal? How is this different than customs and passport control at the airport? Maybe Homeland Security will be funding its construction? Then, I'm of course in favor of naming it whatever they want 🙂!
October 20, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, jeremyck01 said: The plan looks good. My only concern is that the land bridge appears to have gotten more narrow. As far as constructing a land bridge, I would encourage Cleveland leaders to take a look at the Presidio Tunnel Top park in San Francisco. Planners there built an extension of the Presidio over Highway 101 leading to and from the GG Bridge and topped it with an incredible park. It’s a beautiful, functional space. That was my main critique. The main driver of this whole movement was to try to make the experience of walking downtown to the lakefront feel seamless. This doesn’t do that, at all. Their response was the windows of the convention center. My response was, most convention centers don’t have windows. They didn’t dispute that lol.
October 21, 20231 yr The confusion I have with this plan is there doesn’t really seem to be any real integration between it and the stadium. It’s just sort of there. In Steven Litt’s article, the only real mention is that the city would like to close the muni-lots one day and fans can find some other place to pre-game. To an outsider, it appears the city is inviting the team to look elsewhere in the area to build a new stadium. That might be better for the city and team if their ideas on how to use this space are so different Edited October 21, 20231 yr by coneflower
October 21, 20231 yr Also should we read into this geometric massing of the stadium at all and/or the seemingly very purposely otherwise fairly random commercial high rise to the south west of the stadium Edited October 21, 20231 yr by BoomerangCleRes
October 21, 20231 yr 3 hours ago, DO_Summers said: I think i know the answer, but why call it a Homeland Security terminal? How is this different than customs and passport control at the airport? Maybe Homeland Security will be funding its construction? Then, I'm of course in favor of naming it whatever they want 🙂! Because that’s what it is. As the parent organization of Customs and Border Protection, DHS is who will occupy the building. And since there may even be other DHS components there given the port, it makes sense to call it the Homeland Security (note the capitalization) building. And yes, I would imagine that GSA would either construct the building themselves or enter into a long-term lease for it.
October 21, 20231 yr https://x.com/theeferringer/status/1715478639704179155?s=46&t=n62rzPBbNfArJwemouEzQQ pretty cool
October 21, 20231 yr On 10/20/2023 at 11:10 PM, brtshrcegr said: Because that’s what it is. As the parent organization of Customs and Border Protection, DHS is who will occupy the building. And since there may even be other DHS components there given the port, it makes sense to call it the Homeland Security (note the capitalization) building. And yes, I would imagine that GSA would either construct the building themselves or enter into a long-term lease for it. Sigh... It is not okay that Americans are being conditioned & reduced to naming things for our fears rather than our aspirations. This feels like a sad societal resignation of - "Think about the guns first, because that's where the money is coming from." Passenger terminals & immigration checkpoints still deserve names that reflect our civil society in the US. A good name might be something like Port of Cleveland Passenger Center, or whatever. The CLE airport is still called Hopkins Airport, (named for Cleveland's 41st Mayor William R. Hopkins) even thought it features Homeland Security as as a primary component. - No name changes there too, I hope. ⭐When all is said and done It's a terminal for moving people & goods. National security is a key aspect but only a component of why it needs to be there in the first place. Visitors and those returning home from elsewhere still need a place to comfortably get into and out of their ship, plus process themselves and their belongings. ALSO: THE NARROWER LAND BRIDGE IS A FAIL. To HECK with the convention center needing ballroom windows. Build an observation deck or something, and cover that transit hub with a genuine park-like land bridge. Party-room windows are a lame excuse to have bad urban form remain an insult multiple more generations of Clevelanders. - Who is driving that terrible posture and decision? Edited October 23, 20231 yr by ExPatClevGuy Clarity / Add images
October 21, 20231 yr 2 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said: Sigh... It is not okay that Americans are being conditioned & reduced to naming things for our fears rather than our aspirations. This feels like a sad societal resignation of - "Think about the guns first, because that's where the money is coming from." Passenger terminals & immigration checkpoints still deserve names that reflect our civil society in the US. A good name might be something like Port of Cleveland Passenger Center, or whatever. CLE airport is still called Hopkins Airport, even thought it features Homeland Security as as a primary component. - No name changes there too, I hope. ⭐When all is said and done It's a terminal for moving people & goods. National security is a key aspect but only a component of why it needs to be there in the first place. Visitors and those returning home from elsewhere still need a place to get into and out of their ship I think you’re over-emphasizing what, to me, appears to be a small component of the much larger Port of Cleveland, which no one is suggesting be renamed. Welcome being corrected, but the plans are merely highlighting a new structure in which DHS will operate from, nothing more than that. We haven’t seen detailed plans for the Hopkins rebuild yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a (small) section near the likely international gates designated as “Homeland Security”, to show where CPB will control the flow of inbound international passengers. Let’s not make a mountain out of a molehill. Edited October 21, 20231 yr by brtshrcegr
October 21, 20231 yr 13 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said: Same thing as always. Burke flight paths. Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk I'm sure it has as much, if not more to do with Cleveland residential construction economics than Burke. You could build across the street from the stadium up to 200' high per the FAA CFR. Because of the location the FAA would have to review no matter what, but a developer could, if they chose, petition for a height variance and exceed the limit.
October 21, 20231 yr 13 hours ago, CleveFan said: I’d be just fine with something on the scale of Lakewood’s Gold Coast - the good life 24/7 for new downtown residents with ocean-like and (for higher floors, at least) skyline views - Add a boardwalk along the way for everyone to enjoy - don’t let Burke be a reason to limit our potential. North Coast baby! We've got that in Bratenhal and Euclid. Winton Place, Bratenhal Place, and the Vista (probably) are close to or over 200'.
October 21, 20231 yr 37 minutes ago, brtshrcegr said: I think you’re over-emphasizing what, to me, appears to be a small component of the much larger Port of Cleveland, which no one is suggesting be renamed. Welcome being corrected, but the plans are merely highlighting a new structure in which DHS will operate from, nothing more than that. We haven’t seen detailed plans for the Hopkins rebuild yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a (small) section near the likely international gates designated as “Homeland Security”, to show where CPB will control the flow of inbound international passengers. Let’s not make a mountain out of a molehill. You're spot on, this is just how master plans like this work. The final details are naming are something way down the line, you name a block for it's primary function while master planning so the functional intent of it in the plan is easy for anyone to see what your intent actually is. I also suspect that DHS is going to want some new office spaces, so them relocating at least some people to the port makes a ton of sense. For example, you're working with a hospital you don't call something the [donor name] Center, it's just "Outpatient Building" or "Cancer Building" in the master plan diagram. Getting upset because they haven't fully named something in a 60% complete master plan is just silly. On the top of the actual plan, the smaller land bridge is disappointing, but I suspect that it's a result of compromise between a lot of competing interests here. It seems like the city is preparing as if Browns Stadium could still move to somewhere else in the city too. The plan is very much building around it so they can later backfill that space if it moves vs fully integrating it. I get the feeling the city is getting frustrated with a lack of commitment from the Haslems to the lakefront.
October 21, 20231 yr 22 minutes ago, E Rocc said: We've got that in Bratenhal and Euclid. Winton Place, Bratenhal Place, and the Vista (probably) are close to or over 200'. We’re talking about downtowns lakefront.
October 21, 20231 yr 14 hours ago, dave2017 said: It appears that The Shoreway conversion is a go according to these plans. Seven lane boulevard incoming
October 21, 20231 yr Does anyone know if they have developed any plan if the Browns Stadium was to be removed from the lakefront?
October 21, 20231 yr 16 hours ago, dave2017 said: It appears that The Shoreway conversion is a go according to these plans. The Shoreway is I-90 in that stretch, not only a federal highway but the northernmost coast to coast interstate in the US. Major federal approval would be needed to move it, then consider the money to buy the property needed for a replacement route.
October 21, 20231 yr 5 minutes ago, E Rocc said: The Shoreway is I-90 in that stretch, not only a federal highway but the northernmost coast to coast interstate in the US. Major federal approval would be needed to move it, then consider the money to buy the property needed for a replacement route. I-90 diverts south east of here, this is Rt2.
October 21, 20231 yr Is it correct that the Shoreway ends at W 3rd St at which you jog to the left to get to a continuation of the Shoreway westbound?
October 21, 20231 yr 37 minutes ago, urb-a-saurus said: Is it correct that the Shoreway ends at W 3rd St at which you jog to the left to get to a continuation of the Shoreway westbound? I hope so.
October 21, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, Luke_S said: I-90 diverts south east of here, this is Rt2. Yes. The Shoreway through downtown is Ohio Route 2, not US Interstate 90. For some reason, this remains popularly unclear. Edited October 21, 20231 yr by ExPatClevGuy
October 21, 20231 yr 39 minutes ago, KFM44107 said: I hope so. It would be nice to see the shoreway continue along the rail tracks and connect with the west shoreway at Edgewater Park.
October 21, 20231 yr 17 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said: ⭐THE NARROWER LAND BRIDGE IS A FAIL. To H@#% with the convention center needing ballroom windows. Build an observation deck or something, and cover that transit hub with a genuine park-like land bridge. Party-room windows are a lame excuse to have bad urban form be an insult multiple more generations of Clevelanders. I thought the land bridge was a good idea at first, but now I'm not so sure, especially after seeing this latest iteration. If the shoreway is going to be converted to a boulevard and all the ramps and marginal roads are going to be eliminated, maybe they should forget about the land bridge and just reactivate that old pedestrian bridge. Or if that is not feasible, build a modest pedestrian bridge. Edited October 22, 20231 yr by LibertyBlvd
October 21, 20231 yr In general I like the plan, it's more detailed, (I'm still waiting on a higher definition picture than Cleveland.com will provide) my main impression though is that this iteration is a cost cut from previous versions. I agree that the land bridge looks thinner (which is disappointing), and the removal of the considered Shoreway bridge addition suggests that they are running into needing to consider costs. Coming back to reality a bit, but still a great plan. Other things to note, the multimodal transport hub is much more defined, and is now primarily not underneath the landbridge. It definitely looks like the intent is to add bus service. Hopefully they build things so that things can be added later (such as widening the landbridge).
October 21, 20231 yr One other tidbit. While speaking to one of the Field Ops devs, he mentioned that the county had already begun planning the Huntington garage green roof, independent of the rest of the plan. Huntington Park about to get a lot bigger.
October 22, 20231 yr Still don't see much of a connection between city and lakefront even with this latest plan. The smaller land bridge kind of reminds me visually of that old theme whereas the wider land bridge did a better job of disguising that problem. DOn't get me the wrong, a new landbridge like this definitely will facilitate pedestrians heading back and forth- but it doesn't change the reality of lakefront and the city street grid being separate from each other - on either side of a big highway - at least, visually, in the new renderings.
October 22, 20231 yr Am I missing something here with all of the talk about the land bridge being narrower? In comparison, it looks to be almost twice as wide as E.9th, which is a pretty wide street. Edited October 22, 20231 yr by Oldmanladyluck
October 22, 20231 yr 4 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said: Am I missing something here with all of the talk about the land bridge being narrower? In comparison, it looks to be almost twice as wide as E.9th, which is a pretty wide street. I am assuming posters mean it is narrower than the original conceptual plan championed by the Haslams 2-3 years ago, which it is.
October 22, 20231 yr 5 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said: Am I missing something here with all of the talk about the land bridge being narrower? In comparison, it looks to be almost twice as wide as E.9th, which is a pretty wide street. I think, you've basically described the concern pretty well actually. The point of comparison you used was a street, or more accurately, a normal bridge. This was originally sold as a "Landbridge." I asked the question somewhere on this forum, how narrow can a Landbridge get before it becomes just a bridge with a wide sidewalk? The answer I got from another commenter, is that the the bridge should have a cap portion that does double duty as something else, either as a base for buildings or as a park. I think it's a fair question at what point this bridge becomes narrow enough that it might be more fairly described as a wide pedestrian bridge than as a "landbridge" (I.e. a park doing double duty as a bridge). Put another way, I'm not sure you'll be able to forget you're on a bridge with this new design the same way you can on the landbridge to the Gateway Arch in St. Louis, or even on prospect street, there may just not be enough width. Again, not saying the design is bad, but that's the concern.
October 22, 20231 yr 1 hour ago, Htsguy said: I am assuming posters mean it is narrower than the original conceptual plan championed by the Haslams 2-3 years ago, which it is. Correct.
Create an account or sign in to comment