I was having trouble finding the plans on the City’s site so I went to an old Neo Trans article to refresh my memory

“To build the North Coast Connector requires lowering the Shoreway between West 3rd and East 9th streets. Here, the Shoreway is rising and curving south on a bridge over the lakefront tracks and several downtown streets before crossing the Cuyahoga River valley on a separate, mile-long bridge — Ohio’s longest.”

Edited June 3Jun 3 by Henke

12 hours ago, Htsguy said:

The legislation passed at Council just now. Three nays. Slife, Kasey and Polensak

Polensak doesn't like anything. Complete waste of a council seat.

13 hours ago, Enginerd said:

What exactly are their problems with it? I don’t think it’s a that they represent neighborhoods at the outer edges of the City.

I'd guess he probably cares about how fast people can drive from the east to west side.

I wish they would just let the Shoreway flow directly into Lakeside. I don't know why they have it dead-ending into W. 3rd.

^ Maybe they don't want all the shoreway traffic being funneled onto Lakeside.

This article from the guy tasked with leading the waterfront redevelopment is meant to prod Columbus and the Haslams to come back downtown. But since it seems like there is basically zero chance of that happening, it's a pretty depressing read...

https://www.crainscleveland.com/commentary/opinion-browns-stadium-decision-will-heavily-impact-clevelands-lakefront-future

Edited June 10Jun 10 by coneflower

On 6/3/2025 at 9:52 AM, MyPhoneDead said:

Polensak doesn't like anything. Complete waste of a council seat.

We like him in Collinwood, as the election results clearly show. He's more interested in representing his district than the city as a whole. It can be argued that that's a councilman's job, especially when "Cleveland 1" and "Cleveland 2" are real things.

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

We like him in Collinwood, as the election results clearly show. He's more interested in representing his district than the city as a whole. It can be argued that that's a councilman's job, especially when "Cleveland 1" and "Cleveland 2" are real things.

North Collinwood and South Collinwood are two completely different sides. He caters to the former more than the latter and it shows. But agree to disagree, I don't want to take this off topic.

39 minutes ago, MyPhoneDead said:

North Collinwood and South Collinwood are two completely different sides. He caters to the former more than the latter and it shows. But agree to disagree, I don't want to take this off topic.

Fair enough, but it should be noted most of South Collinwood hasn't been in his district, but Hairston's.

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

Fair enough, but it should be noted most of South Collinwood hasn't been in his district, but Hairston's.

Fair point.

CNU

How Cincinnati’s riverfront was transformed

The Ohio River city leveraged two stadiums and a highway reconstruction to build a new waterfront neighborhood, guided by a 1990s plan.

I liked this article about Cincinnati's Riverfront. They're waterfront had many similarities to our lakefront, and I think their waterfront is coming along nicely.

^I have never seen the Banks in person so I am hesitant to opine. But that has never stopped me in the past. 😉 I hope we don't look to it as a model as in my mind it is somewhat of a disappointment. I recall when I first heard of it I was so jealous. A huge swath of land along the river between two new stadiums just minutes from the central business district (a lot closer than our lakefront) with great support from the public sector. 25 years on it is still not finished. Lots of meh architecture and revolving developers. The retail is nothing to write home about, mostly restaurants that seem to struggle at times. Connecting it to the rest of downtown seems to have been an after thought. The riverfront park does seems to have been very well done,

Again I have never been on site (although I know the city pretty well since I went to school nearby), I have read a bunch about it, especially on this forum were there is a fair amount of moaning and groaning for various reasons from many of the gang in Cincy (of course that never happens here up north LOL). Everybody is entitled to their opinion as much of criticism is subjective (although fact that it still has a number of developable lots after all this time is telling), but again I hope we can do better, especially in terms of architecture.

I've seen it in person a few times. The fact that both professional teams play there in their own stadiums makes it a success if nothing else.

Yes, it's still a work in progress but l see the space between the stadiums slowly ( and hopefully) getting filled in. It will take more time but the canvas is there which is more than it was before when it was just highway and parking. More patience is required but it is happening.

I don't think people realize just how difficult it is to build and flesh out an urban area in a region that is not growing like all those hot Sun Belt cities. And even they have trouble sometimes because "Urban" can be a tough sell in this country. It's an up hill battle most of the time.

I like Cincinnati, Columbus too. All 3 C's have interesting (and different) strengths and weaknesses. It makes for a pretty cool competition and l prefer to celebrate the wins regardless of which city they occur in. That being said, Cincinnati does have that arrogant thing going and Columbus has the momentum so we need to pick it up a little. My heart and soul will always be Cleveland.

Edited June 12Jun 12 by cadmen

North Coast Yard setting up.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKm3I-7OE6q/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

On 6/11/2025 at 5:01 PM, Htsguy said:

I hope we don't look to it as a model

I do! Reintroduce the street grid, create a waterfront park with access to the water, connections to downtown, dense mixed use development...that's exactly what I want for our lakefront. What's not to like? We don't have to over think it.

On 6/11/2025 at 5:01 PM, Htsguy said:

25 years on it is still not finished

In 25 years they rebuilt a highway, two professional stadiums, a museum, a concert hall, a major park, created a street grid with about 10 developable parcels with all the associated infrastructure and utilities and underground parking and about 5 mixed use buildings. I'd say they've accomplished a lot in 25 years.

If in the year 2050, our lakefront has a rebuilt Shoreway/Boulevard, 1 new professional stadium, a land bridge, lakefront park, street grid, and about 5 or 6 dense, mixed use buildings with retail and parking, I'd say that's a massive win.

56 minutes ago, Dino said:

I do! Reintroduce the street grid, create a waterfront park with access to the water, connections to downtown, dense mixed use development...that's exactly what I want for our lakefront. What's not to like? We don't have to over think it.

In 25 years they rebuilt a highway, two professional stadiums, a museum, a concert hall, a major park, created a street grid with about 10 developable parcels with all the associated infrastructure and utilities and underground parking and about 5 mixed use buildings. I'd say they've accomplished a lot in 25 years.

If in the year 2050, our lakefront has a rebuilt Shoreway/Boulevard, 1 new professional stadium, a land bridge, lakefront park, street grid, and about 5 or 6 dense, mixed use buildings with retail and parking, I'd say that's a massive win.

If I was starting from scratch planning an urban lakefront, I wouldn't put one stadium on it let alone two. Stadiums end up on the water because that's the only place where enough space can be found, but I wouldn't consider them optimal use of waterfront land. But yeah, otherwise I agree with your post.

4 hours ago, Ethan said:

If I was starting from scratch planning an urban lakefront, I wouldn't put one stadium on it let alone two. Stadiums end up on the water because that's the only place where enough space can be found, but I wouldn't consider them optimal use of waterfront land. But yeah, otherwise I agree with your post.

The usage for the site also dates to the 1930's when that site was literally where our sewers and toxic chemicals dumped into the lake. In some ways they still do...

56 minutes ago, KJP said:

Thanks again @Ardoonave

Downtown Cleveland won’t miss the Browns

By Ken Prendergast / June 20, 2025

A downtown is a horrible place for a National Football League (NFL) stadium. It’s why half of the 32 NFL teams don’t play their home games at downtown-based venues. And when the Cleveland Browns leave downtown for suburban Brook Park, it will be Downtown Cleveland that gains the most their move, not Brook Park. The reasons for this are many.

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/06/20/downtown-cleveland-wont-miss-the-browns/

I love the idea of combining the convention center expansion with the land bridge! Someone should convince them that they need way more space. Extend across the railway and then also turn West connecting to West 3rd. Let's cap the whole gap and really connect downtown to the lakefront. I'm not convinced it could take the full weight of fully extending Downtown's grid over it, but it would be a good place for an outdoor market like Naschmarket in Vienna, or any number of other cool ideas.

Also, if Amtrak is staying on the lakefront, let's build a big beautiful station, maybe in Art Deco... It could go on the other side of the land bridge (East side) and being a multimodal hub would give it more justification (given Amtrak's current pitiful service to Cleveland).

This should be the basis for the land bridge. The current proposal absolutely sucks. It does nothing to change the feel of disconnect from the lakefront. The tracks/shoreway gulf acts as an open wound. The current proposal acts like putting two stitches on that wound. This iteration shows a healing of the wound and an actual feeling of connectedness.

Here's a photo of the physical model that went with the drawings and presentation for the class I mentored in the ACE program at East Tech High in 2019. The RFP was to build a bridge. Coul be any bridge. The kids and I came up with a pedestrian bridge that connected the malls to the Browns Stadium and Great Lakes Science Center.

The bridge had retail buildings down the center, was covered by a semi circle glass roof and connected via elevator and stair to the RTA and Amtrak stations Underneath.

We won first prize!

If only we could've somehow patented that idea, heh, heh.

I think retail buildings can be a game changer in situations like this. Most people walking down High Street in Columbus don’t even realize they walk over a highway crossing to downtown. This gap is huge though and East 9th might be more reasonable to continue a walkable street grid vibe.

I’m completely lost when it comes to downgrading the shoreway though. The costs are extreme and the rail tracks aren’t moving. Even after attending the planning meetings I haven’t heard a clear answer on what exactly improves on a pedestrian level.