Pace is right:  There should be lots of orange barrels.

Pace is right:  There should be lots of orange barrels.

 

And I also think he's 100 percent right that to fix connectivity the pedestrian bridge needs to be much more than a glorified gerbil tube.

Yes, and the comparison to the High Line is a good one.  Maybe when James Corner is done with Public Square...  (I know, they're already picked someone for the bridge)

The Group Plan Commission doesn't have enough money to build the pedestrian connection wider like the High Line. New York had the benefit of cost-effectively transforming pre-existing infrastructure. The High Line was built decades ago as a heavy-duty, multi-track railway corridor to serve docks and warehouses in Manhattan.

The Group Plan Commission doesn't have enough money to build the pedestrian connection wider like the High Line. New York had the benefit of cost-effectively transforming pre-existing infrastructure. The High Line was built decades ago as a heavy-duty, multi-track railway corridor to serve docks and warehouses in Manhattan.

 

I'd much rather they postpone this until it can evolve into something better.

I have expressed on prior occasions that I am nervous about what they are going to come up (especially since now it seems like they are rushing and limited funding) but I am at least willing to wait and see the design before I slit my wrists.

I'm fine with the design.  It's down to it's function for me and gaining better access to the lakefront.  What I will never understand however is why are we dumping this out infront of the RRHOF versus the area of the lakefront that we have been trying to develop for years?  Somewhere closer to the Browns stadium, or right next to it,  would make much better sense.  They might as well put a sign at the entance that says walkway to the RRHOF.  There will be much more that Pace's lakefront has to offer than the RRHOF including shopping, restarants, homes, places to work etc.  This location honestly has alot of people scratching their heads. 

I have expressed on prior occasions that I am nervous about what they are going to come up (especially since now it seems like they are rushing and limited funding) but I am at least willing to wait and see the design before I slit my wrists.

 

At this point my guess is we'll see gerbil-tube-on-concrete-columns. I hope I'm wrong. But rush job and limited funds usually make for poor planning.

 

Does anyone know when they will show design proposal?

I can't say I have great intuition for this type of project, but $25M doesn't sound that "tiny" to me for a project like this.  I'm also pretty happy with the choice of designer.  I doubt we'll see something grandiose, but I am definitely not as pessimistic as some of you guys.

 

Seems like a very big factor outside the control of the bridge designer (and budget) is what the conditions are where the bridge lands at North Coast Harbor.  the design of whatever development ends up in that spot will be hugely important.

I'd much rather they postpone this until it can evolve into something better.

 

I don't like to predict the future, but the trendline is for less money to be available for public works projects. This country increasingly is focused on the cost of such investments rather than their value. So my thought is that communities that are able to build as much infrastructure today will perform better during leaner times to come than those that didn't invest in infrastructure now.

 

Use it or lose it.

The enemy of the good is the perfect.

He who hesitates, waits....

 

Any other cliches I can throw out there?

I'd much rather they postpone this until it can evolve into something better.

 

I don't like to predict the future, but the trendline is for less money to be available for public works projects. This country increasingly is focused on the cost of such investments rather than their value. So my thought is that communities that are able to build as much infrastructure today will perform better during leaner times to come than those that didn't invest in infrastructure now.

 

Use it or lose it.

The enemy of the good is the perfect.

He who hesitates, waits....

 

Any other cliches I can throw out there?

 

I am just hoping that the bridge can still be designed well, at least well enough so in so that we're not regretting it in a few years. Good functionality and aesthetics are essential for the Lakefront.

 

As far as costs are concerned, I hope brighter minds than mine are working to design this thing in a way to capture as much revenue-generating potential as possible.

I'd much rather they postpone this until it can evolve into something better.

 

I don't like to predict the future, but the trendline is for less money to be available for public works projects. This country increasingly is focused on the cost of such investments rather than their value. So my thought is that communities that are able to build as much infrastructure today will perform better during leaner times to come than those that didn't invest in infrastructure now.

 

Use it or lose it.

The enemy of the good is the perfect.

He who hesitates, waits....

 

Any other cliches I can throw out there?

 

Don't eat the yellow snow

Cleveland Lakefront Pedestrian Connector public meeting 6pm Nov 13 -- a critical link for a future intermodal hub!

 

http://publicworks.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_publicworks/en-US/LakeFrntPedPublicMtg.pdf

Can't believe I am first to post something... I'm sure the forum will disagree but I like the designs.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/11/city_county_seek_public_respon.html#incart_river

Can't believe I am first to post something... I'm sure the forum will disagree but I like the designs.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/11/city_county_seek_public_respon.html#incart_river

 

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

 

All three designs are not worthy of even being considered for approval. And even more wrong is the location of where the bridge is to terminate on NCH. This project is being fast tracked by the county/city/group plan commission, but is totally wrong for the city of Cleveland, and its people. So what if the project is not done in time for the RNC. It is the people of Cleveland, and NE Ohio who have to live with the results for years to come. The RNC is only here for a week.

 

Why do I picture a bank tube when I see the three designs. Oh I know why! A bank tube has only one purpose, to take a persons transaction from one point outside the bank, to the teller inside, and back. Well yes ultimately that is what the NCH bridge is suppose to do also, take people from Mall C to NCH, and back. But the bridge should be able to do more than that. There should be benches for people to sit and enjoy the view; there should be planters for flowers/shrubs; trash cans (so trash can be disposed of properly, not thrown down on the tracks/highway below); and what about some art work (besides the design of the bridge itself).

 

I cannot tell how wide the bridge is from the renderings, but it looks to be too narrow also.

 

How is the bridge to tie in with other ideas that have been floating around, such as the NC Transportation Center?

 

I believe the people of Cleveland/NEO deserve much better then what I am seeing in the images here, and if that means the bridge is not done in time for the RNC, so be it. I know this project has been ongoing for a long time, but I am willing to wait a while longer too have it done right. Even if that means more money has too be found to get it done right.

Wow, those are really awful. None make me want to use them in January. And none can possibly be incorporated into a transportation center. Who would want to come out of a warm transportation center concourse with lots of people and drag their luggage across that into the city with a snow squall and a 40-mph wind off the lake when the temperature is 10 degrees?? Even this concept below is better than those pretty but impractical pictures.

 

That is your opinion BCCLE1 and I am certainly entitled to mine.

Can't believe I am first to post something... I'm sure the forum will disagree but I like the designs.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/11/city_county_seek_public_respon.html#incart_river

 

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

 

All three designs are not worthy of even being considered for approval. And even more wrong is the location of where the bridge is to terminate on NCH.

I've said that exact same thing several times.  At this point it's the functionality of the bridge versus the design that I'm aggrevated about.  This needs to terminate in an area that is primed for future development, not the front yard of the RRHOF. 

I warned you.

 

I warned all of you.

That frail structure reminds of scary bridges from the movies....

 

I warned you.

 

I warned all of you.

We weren't listening, we were doing this....

I can't say I have great intuition for this type of project, but $25M doesn't sound that "tiny" to me for a project like this.  I'm also pretty happy with the choice of designer.  I doubt we'll see something grandiose, but I am definitely not as pessimistic as some of you guys.

 

I think i get the award for being most wrong.  I guess this budget really is tiny for a bridge this long if all it can buy is a spindly little suspension bridge.  This thing could still end up being beautiful, but I totally agree with KJP that it risks ending up as more of a seasonal novelty than core connection.  Awesome for jogging and strolling in nice weather, but pretty uncomfortable and uninviting for much of the year.  And still a total wildcard how it ends up landing at NCH if that site ends up getting built out by Pace.

 

I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to spend a little money to enhance the experience on the existing pedestrian bridge and spend the rest of the money elsewhere.  I'm guessing the $10M city money can be used for a lot of other things, even if we lose the state $.

So, by comparison I'm going to guess that something like this option would cost approx $723 Billion?

Yeah, I'm very underwhelmed with these proposals. I guess the 2nd one is the best of the three, but I hope that's not what we get stuck with.

 

I would much rather have something that's wider, at least at the beginning, so that it could somewhat feel like an extension of the mall. Something like this:

 

 

And yes, there needs to be more protection from the elements if they really want to integrate the bridge with the transportation center.

I still don't understand why the termination point is in front of the rock hall. The diagonal, curving walkway has to be more expensive to build than a straight path, perpendicular from the Mall. The path would be shorter, easier to use, and better support future development north of the tracks. The proposed location makes no sense whatsoever.

I still don't understand why the termination point is in front of the rock hall. The diagonal, curving walkway has to be more expensive to build than a straight path, perpendicular from the Mall. The path would be shorter, easier to use, and better support future development north of the tracks. The proposed location makes no sense whatsoever.

 

Correct. As proposed, this bridge will only foster more disconnection between Rock Hall/Stadium/Science Ctr.

That part doesn't bother me, actually.  I think what is now the gap between the two museums is likely to be a major focal point of the lakefront for visitors. Even if Pace doesn't build a hotel there, I think the idea all along has been to build some sort of restaurant/retail pavilion in that spot.  I also wonder if there's a grade issue with the shoreway as you move west from the currently proposed alignment. The higher you have to pass over the highway, the clumsier the landing will be.

 

Seems like another way to cut costs would be have the bridge launch from the City Hall parking garage and sacrifice its NW corner to be a pedestrian route. It would mean losing a few spaces, but that can't be too big a deal.

That part doesn't bother me, actually.  I think what is now the gap between the two museums is likely to be a major focal point of the lakefront for visitors. Even if Pace doesn't build a hotel there, I think the idea all along has been to build some sort of restaurant/retail pavilion in that spot.

 

I agree that gap needs to be a focal point, a crucial one.

 

We are seeing an incomplete picture re: termination point. From comments in recent article it appears the North Coast Harbor stakeholders are very optimistic about future plans to improve connectivity. If that's truly the case, then I'd like to see some evidence that all parties are working together so this money spent isn't a waste. Or a hindrance to future improvements.

 

 

I also wonder if there's a grade issue with the shoreway as you move west from the currently proposed alignment. The higher you have to pass over the highway, the clumsier the landing will be.

 

There is.  There's a pretty limited path where the bridge can cross the shoreway and still provide the needed clearance over the roadway without having to go UP from the Mall before coming back down again from an even higher point, which means a longer ramp downward.  There's also a fairly significant minimum clearance needed over Erieside which just complicates things more.

I actually like the design. I like the arches the most but it sounds like they're leaning against that one

The transit center is paramount, to me.  The bridge will be underutilized if they don't plan it right; and I think they are more concerned about the convention than making a strong connection to the lake

I agree. There could be easily 2 walkways coming off of the transportation center or none. Just have a staircase going down from it. I'm thinking of the lodo area in denver by the train station. Coming from across the river and over the tracks there is the option of a staircase or an elevator.

I think the architect of the convention center should be involved to create a direct walkway to the transportation center. It doesn't need to be a world class design.  From there if people want to have another bridge or two from the top to go wherever the that is fine to allow the over the top connector ideas.  I'll be happy taking steps.

Whats with that stupid loop on the lakefront end? That space should be filled in with restaurants/retail on the street level and offices/condos/apartments not useless green space. There needs to be street activity on both sides of the bridge, otherwise, what's the point?!? 

^the necessity for it is explained in Litt's article.

^I think I found what you're citing:

 

"Renderings and plans show that the ramp and staircase would have to occupy a fair amount of the 300-foot-wide space between the Rock Hall and the Great Lakes Science Center, just south of a spot where lakefront developer Richard Pace has proposed building a multistory hotel tower."

 

Preventing a use with lots of people and activity to build a bridge to a lower use is akin to RTA tearing down buildings to build a stupid bus station, after they've removed all the density and potential riders. A hotel at this location is brilliant. Residences and some retail would be good too---but either is far superior than green grass. if you want a ramp for ADA compliance or bicycles, this can still be done over the street or sidewalk with a very oblong shaped ramping system--you don't need a big giant circle--you don't have to destroy plans for a very important use and, in doing so, forcing the keeping of unsightly green grass and a virtual dead zone.

^Agreed

Cleveland has too many lawns downtown, I thought that last time I was there. It doesn't seem natural, environmental or cost effective. There are better urban ways  to do natural water seepage and green usable space that fit in better within a downtown environment than suburban style lawns. They are well cared for though, I'll give them that.

^Agreed

Cleveland has too many lawns downtown, I thought that last time I was there. It doesn't seem natural, environmental or cost effective. There are better urban ways  to do natural water seepage and green usable space that fit in better within a downtown environment than suburban style lawns. They are well cared for though, I'll give them that.

 

You're joking right?  We have ONE  historical green space and that is the mall.  It was originally fountains and now its much appreciated green space.  I like the fact that we have green space and downtown Cleveland is not a concrete jungle like NY.  A place where they build "public spaces" in order to build higher and add nearby street activity. 

^I'm pretty sure his point is we have lots of lawns that aren't historical green space or otherwise special in any way.

 

Things like this:https://www.google.com/maps/@41.504907,-81.6875647,3a,75y,250.46h,86.06t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s0hRLjZ4tFYVaynFYpXxzvQ!2e0

And https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5057732,-81.6910633,3a,75y,344.34h,93t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJKygtjymTERiyl6Gic4DNQ!2e0

 

I totally agree with Metro.  Fortunately the days of office park site planning downtown seem to be over.

I totally agree with Metro.  Fortunately the days of office park site planning downtown seem to be over.

 

With the exception of CSU.

 

So, is this theoretical North Coast Harbor hotel going to sit on a 6 story parking deck? They going to tack on a few levels to the Science Center garage? Because I know damn sure they're not going to abide running valets over to the North Point Garage, God forbid. I've never really understood developing that plot before the larger pieces at the ports come into play. If someone wants to come in and build a hotel later they can modify the loop and integrate it into their site plan.

All I want is a Prague-type pedestrian bridge with statues of famous Clevelanders  :-P

 

^can we start with a Jimmy Dimora statue?

Just playing along with the famous Clevelander bridge (the Charles Bridge in Prague is awesome), who would be on there?

 

Rockefeller

Garrett Morgan

Tom Johnson

Marcus Hanna

Moses Cleaveland

Stokes

Bob Hope

Garfield

Mantis & Oris Van Sweringen

Brush

Schrekengost (sp)

You know they'd put it to a vote and we'd end up with Kosar, Feagler, Kucinich and Ghoulardi.

Jesse Owens, Dick Goddard and Dorothy Fuldheim! ;-)

Why wouldn't something like this work?

 

 

It's basically the same length of the hypothetical bridge that would terminate at the RRHoF (probably shorter), and it crosses the shoreway at roughly the same spot.

 

I really think it would be a mistake to have the termination point at the Rock Hall. Instead it should terminate at the yard in front of (behind?) the Science Center. Of course, the yard would need to be converted into an urban plaza, with maybe some apartments and retail off of Erieside, and that "Key Plaza" driveway needs to be destroyed ;)

You know they'd put it to a vote and we'd end up with Kosar, Feagler, Kucinich and Ghoulardi.

 

Ghoulardi!  Awesome...

I agree that west of the GLSC seems like the better endpoint, but look at the elevation.  Looks like you need quite a lot of space to lessen the incline to something that's viable, probably for ADA reasons.  That might be why a direct route across from the mall will not work. 

Word is that this would be longest pedestrian bridge in Ohio. If this were enclosed, it would actually produce its own weather on hot sunny days.

 

The fact it's so long tells me it should have a midpoint access to the ground for various security reasons, not the least of which is so that if someone was confronted or worse by a stranger (or even in a domestic violence incident), they would have an escape route without having to run all the way to the other end for help.

 

Just playing along with the famous Clevelander bridge (the Charles Bridge in Prague is awesome), who would be on there?

 

Rockefeller

Garrett Morgan

Tom Johnson

Marcus Hanna

Moses Cleaveland

Stokes

Bob Hope

Garfield

Mantis & Oris Van Sweringen

Brush

Schrekengost (sp)

 

+Johnny Manziel

Word is that this would be longest pedestrian bridge in Ohio. If this were enclosed, it would actually produce its own weather on hot sunny days.

 

The fact it's so long tells me it should have a midpoint access to the ground for various security reasons, not the least of which is so that if someone was confronted or worse by a stranger (or even in a domestic violence incident), they would have an escape route without having to run all the way to the other end for help.

 

I am sure there will be security cameras and maybe call boxes of some sort. Just a though but they should set up operations for the pedestrian bridge in the new 'NCH bridge house' that will control the NCH bridge. The bridge operator could monitor security on both bridges. Also I've thought with the cable stayed option an elevator could rise from the amtrak parking lot up to the walkway for passengers arriving or going down to depart.