4 minutes ago, JB said:

Speaking as someone who lives on the east side and uses the shoreway, who cares if someone like me has a problem converting it to a boulevard. Do what’s best for the city. If someone has an issue with this that lives on the eastside, maybe we should move into the city so we are closer to everything.

I admit that on a yearly basis I probably drive the Shoreway only  5-6 times a year between the Innerbelt and Lakewood.  That said, it always seems like it is me and 2-3 other cars for the entire length of my travel.  I am sure there are times it backs up but I cannot imagine it is like the regular backups on freeways around town (pre covid).  Most people going cross town along the lake use 90, even if going to Lakewood.  The exception is probably those driving to the northern part of Lakewood (Gold Coast) etc., but I cannot imagine those numbers are that great to be a road block to a better urban experience in downtown Cleveland.

I use the Shoreway daily, the distance between where the current “boulevard” exists with a 35 mph speed limit and deadman’s curve is such a short distance that turning that connection into a boulevard would  hardly make a difference. I honestly do not believe theres a legitimate counter to keeping it how it is, anyone that comes up with a problem with it, which idk what that would be, can just continue on I-90

Edited December 20, 20231 yr by BoomerangCleRes

6 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

I use the Shoreway daily, the distance between where the current “boulevard” exists with a 35 mph speed limit and deadman’s curve is such a short distance that turning that connection into a boulevard would  hardly make a difference. I honestly do not believe theres a legitimate counter to keeping it how it is, anyone that comes up with a problem with it, which idk what that would be, can just continue on I-90

I just returned from an extended Europe trip.  This wouldn't be a debate there because the government would just spend the money to tunnel the road under downtown and the river, leaving the land above for people and living.    Here in the USA these kinds of infrastructure projects aren't even discussed....

9 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

I just returned from an extended Europe trip.  This wouldn't be a debate there because the government would just spend the money to tunnel the road under downtown and the river, leaving the land above for people and living.    Here in the USA these kinds of infrastructure projects aren't even discussed....

We do seem to value engineer more times than not but to be fair at least they’re talking about doing something rather than nothing at all

46 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I admit that on a yearly basis I probably drive the Shoreway only  5-6 times a year between the Innerbelt and Lakewood.  That said, it always seems like it is me and 2-3 other cars for the entire length of my travel.  I am sure there are times it backs up but I cannot imagine it is like the regular backups on freeways around town (pre covid).  Most people going cross town along the lake use 90, even if going to Lakewood.  The exception is probably those driving to the northern part of Lakewood (Gold Coast) etc., but I cannot imagine those numbers are that great to be a road block to a better urban experience in downtown Cleveland.

When I lived in Lakewood and traveled back to the east side to visit family, it was never backed up.

I haven't seen this posted anywhere. No real new information, but it does a good job highlighting the crucial role the port has played in game changing infrastructure projects, particularly CHEERS. 

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/politics-policy/clevelands-port-driving-300-million-cheers-project

1 hour ago, JB said:

Speaking as someone who lives on the east side and uses the shoreway, who cares if someone like me has a problem converting it to a boulevard. Do what’s best for the city. If someone has an issue with this that lives on the eastside, maybe we should move into the city so we are closer to everything.

 

As long as they don't mess with the part east of the curve it should be fine.   At that point it becomes 90 and disrupting it has national transportation implications in a big way.

8 minutes ago, Ethan said:

I haven't seen this posted anywhere. No real new information, but it does a good job highlighting the crucial role the port has played in game changing infrastructure projects, particularly CHEERS. 

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/politics-policy/clevelands-port-driving-300-million-cheers-project

 

Paywalled, but I don't see how anyone economically literate can deny the supreme importance of the port.

 

I'd like to see more intermodal development around there.  You have the longest interstate in the USA, a rail line, and an underutilized airport all within a mile.   

Would the proposed boulevard end at the river? Would the part of the shoreway west of West 25th remain the same? When I visit Cleveland, we like to go downtown, and from there, head to Edgewater and visit family on the gold coast. As an outside visitor, I found that one of the reasons Cleveland was nice to visit was the ease of getting around and inexpensive parking. Reasonable parking isn't as easy to find and in the future it may not be so easy to get around. I realize how evil the automobile is viewed in this forum, but there will be some negative effects of taking away options for drivers. I want what's best for Cleveland and downtown, I just hope negative impacts are also configured when these decisions are made. 

One of the proposals has the boulevard ending at West 3rd.  Motorists traveling west would have to take West 3rd to Lakeside to get back on the west shoreway.   Of course the Main Avenue bridge is nearing the end of its lifespan, so it seems like the future of that section of the shoreway also needs to be factored into the discussion. 

 

Edited December 20, 20231 yr by LibertyBlvd

I like the Main Avenue Bridge for the great views of the downtown skyline while traversing it.  Even so, I would really prefer a tunnel as it would free up land and make surface street connections better.  However, my guess is that will never happen for cost reasons.

2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

As long as they don't mess with the part east of the curve it should be fine.   At that point it becomes 90 and disrupting it has national transportation implications in a big way.

Isn’t that what the plan is?

1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said:

One of the proposals has the boulevard ending at West 3rd.  Motorists traveling west would have to take West 3rd to Lakeside to get back on the west shoreway.   Of course the Main Avenue bridge is nearing the end of its lifespan, so it seems like the future of that section of the shoreway also needs to be factored into the discussion. 

 

 

The Main Avenue Bridge is very similar in design and construction to the former Inner Belt bridge. The only major differences between the two is that Main Avenue Bridge is about 15 years older and sees only about 30,000-40,000 cars per day and few trucks while the Inner Belt gets 150,000-160,000 vehicles per day many of which are trucks. It cost something like $600 million to replace the Inner Belt bridge 10-15 years ago with two new bridges. Is that scale of cost justified for the lighter traffic that the Main Avenue Bridge gets? 

4 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

The Main Avenue Bridge is very similar in design and construction to the former Inner Belt bridge. The only major differences between the two is that Main Avenue Bridge is about 15 years older and sees only about 30,000-40,000 cars per day and few trucks while the Inner Belt gets 150,000-160,000 vehicles per day many of which are trucks. It cost something like $600 million to replace the Inner Belt bridge 10-15 years ago with two new bridges. Is that scale of cost justified for the lighter traffic that the Main Avenue Bridge gets? 

I am actually surprised that the Main Avenue Bridge gets even that amount of traffic.  Like I posted above, traffic always seems abnormally light when ever I am on it.

So maybe when the time comes, just remove the Main Avenue bridge and let east-west vehicles use Detroit-Superior?

54 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I am actually surprised that the Main Avenue Bridge gets even that amount of traffic.  Like I posted above, traffic always seems abnormally light when ever I am on it.

 

Those numbers are pre-pandemic. Probably less nowadays.

I think it’d be great if the Main Ave bridge just converted 100% to Lakeside. Eliminate the whole shoreway from West 6th to east of Burke’s terminal, making Lakeside the main east-west route through downtown. You would just need to reconnect east of downtown. It’s obviously plenty wide enough. 

I would really love to see accurate street-level renderings of the different Shoreway options.  I’ve heard things like “extend the street grid” and “crosswalks” and I’m really struggling to picture how much of an improvement it would be with the rail tracks and grade change. 
 

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but I don’t think major changes to the Shoreway will be worth the cost or effort.  I think it would be far harder than the west side of the Shoreway and look at what we got. 

^ I would agree anything like the west shoreway would be a colossal failure.  It needs to be more city street and less "boulevard". The high level pictures don't inspire confidence though. But none of that means we shouldn't try. 

9 minutes ago, CLEmuppet said:

I would really love to see accurate street-level renderings of the different Shoreway options.  I’ve heard things like “extend the street grid” and “crosswalks” and I’m really struggling to picture how much of an improvement it would be with the rail tracks and grade change. 
 

I know it’s an unpopular opinion but I don’t think major changes to the Shoreway will be worth the cost or effort.  I think it would be far harder than the west side of the Shoreway and look at what we got. 

Not sure how well I'll be able to capture the elevations but I can start putting together a lakefront street plan view, to satisfy our curiosity for a month or two lol.

 

 

4 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Of course the Main Avenue bridge is nearing the end of its lifespan, so it seems like the future of that section of the shoreway also needs to be factored into the discussion.

Is it actually? (Genuinely curious) The blue steel is really awesome to see in person and gives the flats an added extra charm and grandeur. I think you could just end the western route 2 shoreway where the current Lakeside Ave/w 6th and w 3rd area is (see my plans in KJP's article) and not have to worry about touching the river portion of the bridge. I dont work for ODOT though... 😂

 

Count me in as a big fan of the Main Avenue Bridge. Crossing it from west to east has the best view of downtown plus its hulking (or is it graceful?) mass as seen from the Flats is a great visual piece of sculpture. It is a wonderful place setter for the Flats. The Bridge manages to grab both the east and west side and makes the Flats special. Remove it and the Flats is just a wide river valley - nothing distinctive.

Tne bridge was also shown in the first intro/theme song of the Drew Carey show, a veritable Cleveland icon. 

15 hours ago, marty15 said:

I think it’d be great if the Main Ave bridge just converted 100% to Lakeside. Eliminate the whole shoreway from West 6th to east of Burke’s terminal, making Lakeside the main east-west route through downtown. You would just need to reconnect east of downtown. It’s obviously plenty wide enough. 

 

I like this idea, but you'll have to excuse me if I don't use your satellite pic if I discuss it elsewhere.    :)

17 hours ago, Mendo said:

^ I would agree anything like the west shoreway would be a colossal failure.  It needs to be more city street and less "boulevard". The high level pictures don't inspire confidence though. But none of that means we shouldn't try. 

Anything less than a city street should just be buried under a cap (which is my preference).      Even a city street would have a freight railroad running alongside it. 

https://thelandcle.org/stories/something-to-cheer-about-metroparks-makes-updates-to-east-side-lakefront-project-set-to-move-forward-in-2025/

 

Something to CHEER about: Metroparks makes updates to east side lakefront project, set to move forward in 2025

BY S. ELIZABETH SIGLER ● COMMUNITY JOURNALISM, DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH, SOCIAL EQUITY, SUSTAINABILITY● DECEMBER 14,

 

Cleveland Metroparks recently held a community open house to update residents, community members, and stakeholders on the CHEERS (Cleveland Harbor Eastern Embayment Resilience Strategy) project, which aims to transform the east side lakefront so it’s more natural, accessible, and attractive. Some of the changes include designated fishing areas, a multipurpose lawn or picnic area at the E. 55th St. marina, and improved water safety features for boaters. 

Crazy amount of area dedicated to parking lots 

35 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

Crazy amount of area dedicated to parking lots 

To be fair, 2, 3, 6, and part of 5 are already there. Half of these are primarily for marinas / yacht clubs. 

45 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

Crazy amount of area dedicated to parking lots 

 

I don't disagree, but in fairness, all of them except for 1 and 4 are already there. 5 even appears to be a consolidation of existing ones and might be less spaces than currently exist in that spot.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5369576,-81.6441774,1208m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

They did it!  They pulled it off!  They've created the world's most convoluted and forced acronym!  CHEERS (Cleveland Harbor Eastern Embayment Resilience Strategy).  Bravo, Cleveland Metroparks.  Well done.

10 minutes ago, Dino said:

They did it!  They pulled it off!  They've created the world's most convoluted and forced acronym!  CHEERS (Cleveland Harbor Eastern Embayment Resilience Strategy).  Bravo, Cleveland Metroparks.  Well done.

LOLWUT

Loftiness Over Likeliness Waterfront Upgrade Transformation

21 minutes ago, gpodawund said:

 

I don't disagree, but in fairness, all of them except for 1 and 4 are already there. 5 even appears to be a consolidation of existing ones and might be less spaces than currently exist in that spot.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5369576,-81.6441774,1208m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

 

A lot of this is balancing existing parking for mostly fishing trailers at E72 (you can't eliminate that parking) and offsetting with other parking. Metroparks envision this as an Edgewater type draw and reminder that Edgewater has over 10ac of parking (not including when they expand it to the lawn), and they still need to shut the area down in summer. Not saying it'll be the same with beach and all that but imagine how much parking is contained in like South Chagrin Reservation. This'll be a big draw for folks who don't want to drive to get their nature fix.

7 minutes ago, Husat77 said:

Loftiness Over Likeliness Waterfront Upgrade Transformation

 

Except it's happening. The metroparks have a ton of money (theirs, grants, ODOT and Federal DOT) behind this. A lot of the dredging from the river will go into this too, since the airport cell has a limited lifespan at this point. 

 

A major part of cheers is the hardening of the shoreline to prevent erosion of I90. Moving it completely went out the window when costs and traffic disruptions came in - billions vs millions.

And I have the same issue with Edgewater why give up lakefront land to parking. Find a solution with something across from I-90 there’s already an unutilized ped bridge connection with Gordon park. I think most of lots wouldn’t change the park experience too much except 1 and 3 feels like encroach a bit too much into the park. 
 

 

3 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

And I have the same issue with Edgewater why give up lakefront land to parking. Find a solution with something across from I-90 there’s already an unutilized ped bridge connection with Gordon park. I think most of lots wouldn’t change the park experience too much except 1 and 3 feels like encroach a bit too much into the park. 
 

 

My dream is them developing the parking lot on the lake at Edgewater into a beachy restaurant/hospitality spot allowing the boardwalk to come alive.

12 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

And I have the same issue with Edgewater why give up lakefront land to parking. Find a solution with something across from I-90 there’s already an unutilized ped bridge connection with Gordon park. I think most of lots wouldn’t change the park experience too much except 1 and 3 feels like encroach a bit too much into the park. 
 

 

 

This is also a big part of the plan. There really isn't that much public parking in the plan. Most of what you see is private marina parking as @Ethan pointed out. There are four yacht clubs in this stretch vs Edgewater's one, measuring out current parking there's <5 acres of public parking right now if you take into account the 2.5ish for boat parking you can bump that up.

 

They're going to maintain the current pedestrian bridge coming across from the newly acquired Gordon Park and envision that as overflow parking as needed.

 

Don't mean to be a metroparks stan, but after going to their public house on this and walking w/some of the planners a lot of the criticism here has already been addressed.

Edited December 22, 20231 yr by GISguy

14 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

Except it's happening. The metroparks have a ton of money (theirs, grants, ODOT and Federal DOT) behind this. A lot of the dredging from the river will go into this too, since the airport cell has a limited lifespan at this point. 

 

A major part of cheers is the hardening of the shoreline to prevent erosion of I90. Moving it completely went out the window when costs and traffic disruptions came in - billions vs millions.

Just a throwaway joke about our years of lakefront frustration.  I'm looking forward to seeing this development.  I spend a good amount of time at the Lakefront Nature Preserve, and it will be great to walk over to this for additional trails and park space.

I think all this talk about parking is missing the point here. If you focus on the newly created land and even more importantly the shape of that land you will see something rarely done in these parts. An actual natural looking shoreline not that unnatural geometric infill we have gotten in the past. 

 

The infill on the downtown shoreline is an unimaginative, industrial example of a lack of vision. A dumbed down missed opportunity. This new project finally creates what we should have been doing all along.

 

Think the Toronto Islands. A natural and convoluted shoreline. A great place to escape the city and yet it's right off the shoreline. An amazing view of the skyline. They did it. So should we have. It wouldn't even have cost all that much more. After all, the river was already being dredged. We were already using it to create new land. Think outside the box a little.

 

I love this town but too many times we settle for mediocrity (or worse). Often the difference between bad and good is a little thought and leadership. I think we are finally on the upswing again. As long as we're going to be doing new things let's try to raise the bar on our expectations.

also, regarding parking. this isn't really in the middle of a neighborhood. I'm zoomed out pretty far and am not seeing many houses within a walkable distance.

 

7 hours ago, Dino said:

They did it!  They pulled it off!  They've created the world's most convoluted and forced acronym!  CHEERS (Cleveland Harbor Eastern Embayment Resilience Strategy).  Bravo, Cleveland Metroparks.  Well done.

You must have never served in the U.S. military! LOL

6 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

A lot of this is balancing existing parking for mostly fishing trailers at E72 (you can't eliminate that parking) and offsetting with other parking. Metroparks envision this as an Edgewater type draw and reminder that Edgewater has over 10ac of parking (not including when they expand it to the lawn), and they still need to shut the area down in summer. Not saying it'll be the same with beach and all that but imagine how much parking is contained in like South Chagrin Reservation. This'll be a big draw for folks who don't want to drive to get their nature fix.

I can't tell you how disappointing it was for my wife and i when we were returning from Ashtabula to Columbus over the summer when Edgewater was closed to visitors. We had picked up a pizza from a new pizza joint in Lakewood intending to enjoy it at Edgewater Park on a beautiful summer Saturday, only to be denied the opportunity. I had no idea they had rolling closures in the summer. I can only imagine how it might have been for someone who has never been to CLE and didn't have the opportunity to see visit that great park. 

18 minutes ago, TMart said:

I can't tell you how disappointing it was for my wife and i when we were returning from Ashtabula to Columbus over the summer when Edgewater was closed to visitors. We had picked up a pizza from a new pizza joint in Lakewood intending to enjoy it at Edgewater Park on a beautiful summer Saturday, only to be denied the opportunity. I had no idea they had rolling closures in the summer. I can only imagine how it might have been for someone who has never been to CLE and didn't have the opportunity to see visit that great park. 

Technically the park is open, you just can't drive to it.    My house is in walking distance and I had sort of hoped for this kind of thing years ago when I bought it...just never expected it to the level it has become. 😃

 

On a side note, I'd be pretty miffed if I was a member at Edgewater, Whiskey Island or Olde River yacht club and couldn't get to my club or boat!  I imagine a lot of members plan on spending nice weekends down there to avoid the mess. 

7 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

Technically the park is open, you just can't drive to it.    My house is in walking distance and I had sort of hoped for this kind of thing years ago when I bought it...just never expected it to the level it has become. 😃

 

On a side note, I'd be pretty miffed if I was a member at Edgewater, Whiskey Island or Olde River yacht club and couldn't get to my club or boat!  I imagine a lot of members plan on spending nice weekends down there to avoid the mess. 

Members are the always allowed in just have to show their pass

So do they ever charge for parking at Edgewater? Based on the comments above it sounds like they could at peak periods to discourage parking lot overflow.

15 hours ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

Members are the always allowed in just have to show their pass

Yes they are allowed in--after sitting on traffic on the shoreway for an hour to get to the ramp to negotiate with the park rangers.   And what about their guests? 

 

Cleveland Lake Shore Power Plant land gets new owner
By Ken Prendergast / December 30, 2023

 

It seemed too good to be true, and alas, it was. Title to a large, mostly vacant property for the former Lake Shore Power Station, 6800 S. Marginal Rd., in Cleveland, is being transferred to a new owner. The 62-acre site is across Interstate 90 from the bulk of Cleveland Metroparks’ lakefront improvements. But it’s not the Metroparks, the city or even a developer seeking to add recreation, housing or a mix thereof next to Lake Erie.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2023/12/30/cleveland-lake-shore-power-plant-land-gets-new-owner/

PLEASE extend the RTA Waterfront line east and make this a TOD!!! This site can't be more than a mile from the current end of the Waterfront Line and would be an easy "get."

So reading between the lines a power company buys land on which a former power plant was located to build...

another power plant? 

 

Say it ain't so Jo(Ken).

No, the transfer of land as part of the Vistra's acquisition of Energy Harbor is a matter of course. What Vistra intends to do with the site is unknown. They probably don't even know yet. Once the Energy Harbor acquisition is complete, they could turn around and sell it again -- if there is an interested buyer. 

Perhaps it could be the site of a new stadium?

just for the hell of it.. did some digging,  and based on vistra vision renewable energy goals and the size of the former power plant land.  chatGPT AI predicted either renewable energy projects, or based on future development around the area, a sell off.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯