The bridge is baaaack... It's actually quite attractive in this form.  I'm just hoping that elaborate curly-Q landing to the side of the Rock Hall won't impair the building's iconic visage. 

One thing I would change. Before it starts the curly q, I would add stairs that walk down toward the rock hall.  Still keep the curly however as shown, just add stairs too.  Just seems like a lot of extra walking if coming and going to the rock hall, or E 9th Pier attractions.

One thing I would change. Before it starts the curly q, I would add stairs that walk down toward the rock hall.  Still keep the curly however as shown, just add stairs too.  Just seems like a lot of extra walking if coming and going to the rock hall, or E 9th Pier attractions.

 

You can see stairs in the rendering closer to the Rock Hall.

I like it.  Reminds me a bit of that bridge in Boston, on a smaller scale of course.  If Lakefront development really takes off, I actually wouldn't mind seeing a twin built

Did anything change from when this was postponed? Or is it more about the construction and not having to eliminate any detail now that we aren't in such a rush?

^The estimated price seems to have changed.

 

Design review committee approves lakefront bridge, estimated to cost $8M more than funds committed to date

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/10/design_review_committee_approv.html#incart_river_home

That a lot of cash, and this city has a lot of needs.  Bridge looks nifty but seems unwise in the context of those needs.

This developer deems that bridge to be very important for its lakefront project. It loves the multi-modal station project too, enough that it wants the facility designed in such a way that a private-sector development could be built as part of it. But I don't think this TIF is part of that. I think this is for the streets, sewers etc. that are needed for the previously announced phases...

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/10162015/index.php

 

City Planning Commission

Agenda for October 16, 2015

 

MANDATORY REFERRALS

Ordinance No. xxx-15(Ward 3/Councilmember Cimperman): Authorizing the Director of Economic Development to enter into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement (TIF) with Cumberland TCC for Lakefront Parcels A-B-C in the Lakefront Development Project.

Ordinance No. xxx-15(Ward 3/Councilmember Cimperman): Authorizing the Director of Economic Development to enter into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement (TIF) with Cumberland TCC for Lakefront Parcels D-E-F in the Lakefront Development Project.

 

Plus:

 

DOWNTOWN/FLATS DESIGN REVIEW

 

DF2015-044 – North Coast Harbor Site 1A: Seeking Final Approval

Project Location: North Coast Harbor, Voinovich Park

Project Representatives: Richard Pace, Cumberland Development

Gary Ogrocki, Dimit Architects

Matt Plecnik, Dimit Architects

Simon Beer, Office of James Burnett

David Ebersole, City of Cleveland

Note: This project received Schematic Design Approval on June 5, 2015.

 

 

 

 

I don't recall urban beach volleyball being part of this!!! That is exciting!

Great...more parking... :|

I don't recall urban beach volleyball being part of this!!! That is exciting!

 

Let's bring the AVP volleyball tour to Cleveland!

Great...more parking... :|

 

Different parking. Better parking, IMHO.

Love the volleyball idea!

 

I heard a woman in the City's Law Department has been making things VERY difficult for the developer lately regarding land leases.  Hope they can work through it. 

I believe that lakefront land leases are extremely complex, particularly land fill land.  Technically the land underneath the fill land (the original lake floor) is state property. 

^ Why would the state have any reason to make this difficult? They should just give the land over to the City.

^I agree 100%. But who knows, the state may be leasing that "land" to another party at higher rates than it is to be purchased by the city.  I'm sure it runs deeper (pardon the pun) than we all know. 

I doubt the State would be making things difficult by choice. But once you involve multiple levels of government, and on top of that multiple departments and agencies within those governments....it simply gets caught up in the slow moving bureaucratic mess. :/

There's certainly a lot of red tape involved, and from what I understand because it is reclaimed land there are multiple levels of government that are involved here. I think that the priority should be on getting this project underway as soon as possible. Once this is done I think it will give a lot of credibility to the rest of the lakefront plans.

I'm sure there is also some environmental risk that the state is not offering indemnity on that the City is fighting for. 

I heard the problem is with a woman in the City Law Dept who is assigned to this (not the State).  That is causing a hold up now.   

One person's hold up is another's making sure contracts are written correctly to follow proper use of taxpayers money.

One person's hold up is another's making sure contracts are written correctly to follow proper use of taxpayers money.

 

hmmm.  For some reason I knew that was coming.  :wink:

There's certainly a lot of red tape involved, and from what I understand because it is reclaimed land there are multiple levels of government that are involved here. I think that the priority should be on getting this project underway as soon as possible. Once this is done I think it will give a lot of credibility to the rest of the lakefront plans.

 

Red tape like this put one of Ohio's oldest companies (Taylor Chair) out of business when they were trying to do the right thing.

Downtown Cleveland lakefront development could see city funding for infrastructure, parks.

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/10/downtown_cleveland_lakefront_d_1.html#incart_river_home

 

Great work by mjarboe[/member] for clearing up questions I had regarding 'site b'. I was wondering what happened with that component of Phase 1.  Pace hopes to break ground on that 4 story building late in the year. Also that Cleveland Pickle and Cleveland Bike Tours are possible tenants, along with Pace who plans to move his office there. Thnx Michelle!

Does anyone else question the Cleveland Pickle thing? It's basically a lunch only place (open 11-4) and it's going to either move from 9th/Euclid or open a new spot all the way down on the lakefront?

 

Don't get me wrong I know they want foot traffic there but getting a big lunch crowd seems like a pipe dream. But! I live downtown and don't work there so maybe I'm wrong....

Does anyone know when the North Coast Harbor bridge supposed to be installed?  This project has been in the works since 2007

 

As of July 2015, the deadline is 2017

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3638.msg764031/topicseen.html#msg764031

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/07/2017_deadline_helps_cuyahoga_c.html

or maybe he is talking about this one...

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/PDbridge/overview.html

^I think he is.

Lockdog is correct.    The bridge that completes the loop around the harbor.

Lakefront enough I guess

 

 

*Schematic Design Approval

4. Project: DF2015-104: Superman Plaza

Project Address: Erieside Avenue

Project Representative: Hutch Stoller, Chairmen, Superman Committee; David Deming,

Artist; Donn Angus, Chief City Planner, City Planning Commission

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/11202015/DRC_2015_11_19.pdf

And this is how you get streets and utilities into a lakefront development....

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/11202015/index.php

 

City Planning Commission

Agenda for November 20, 2015

 

Ordinance No. 1400-15(Ward 3/Councilmember Cimperman): Authorizing the Director of Economic Development to enter into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement with Cumberland TCC, LLC, or its designee, or others, to provide for redevelopment of Sites A, B, and C as part of the Lakefront Development Plan; to provide for payments to the Cleveland City School District; and to declare certain improvements to real property to be a public purpose.

 

Ordinance No. 1401-15(Ward 3/Councilmember Cimperman): Authorizing the Director of Economic Development to enter into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement with Cumberland TCC, LLC, or its designee, or others, to provide for redevelopment of Sites D, E, and F as part of the Lakefront Development Plan; to provide for payments to the Cleveland City School District; and to declare certain improvements to real property to be a public purpose.

City Planning Commission approves early "schematic" plans for lakefront Superman monument

 

http://www.cleveland.com/arts/index.ssf/2015/11/city_planning_commission_appro.html#incart_river_home

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio –The city's Planning Commission gave an enthusiastic thumb's up on Friday to plans for a Superman monument on the city's lakefront.

 

"This is going to be an awesome addition," said commission member Lawrence Lumpkin, who chaired Friday's meeting.

 

Lakewood artist David Deming described his vision for a 13-foot-long stainless steel statue of the Man of Steel, which would be mounted on a 36-foot-high pylon.

 

 

At least there will be something to look forward to on Cleveland's lakefront! Maybe we should have built more of this instead of the Factory Of Sadness?

 

Cleveland City Council approves first of six tax deals for lakefront development

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2015/11/council_approves_first_of_six.html

At least there will be something to look forward to on Cleveland's lakefront! Maybe we should have built more of this instead of the Factory Of Sadness?

 

Cleveland City Council approves first of six tax deals for lakefront development

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2015/11/council_approves_first_of_six.html

 

Phase I is very modest, but ya gotta start somewhere. I'm glad to see this finally getting some positive traction.

Here ya go. I opened up my checkbook, moved the FirstEnergy substation, constructed the warehouses and light industrial buildings, and built the mid-rise residential buildings that grow in height from the Quay 55 on the west to the approximate current height of the top of the First Energy smokestack (the numbers in the buildings show building heights in stories, except when followed with a K which refers to the thousands of square feet those commercial buildings could be sized). So when you head out east on the Shoreway, let me know how you like it! :)

 

 

 

Hey, the first step in "The Dream Project" above.... :)

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/12042015/DRC2015_12_3.pdf

 

Downtown/Flats

Design Review Agenda

 

Thursday December 3rd, 2015 Draft

Cleveland City Hall

Room 514

* Final Design Development Approval – Demolition

1. Project: DF2015-107: FirstEnergy Lakeshore Power Plant Demolition Project

Project Address: 6800 South Marginal Road

Project Representative: Leo Slansky, Independence Excavating, Inc.; John Estremera, FirstEnergy

 

 

BTW: reminder that there is speculation of future alternative uses but nothing firm yet....

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/08/firstenergys_lakeshore_power_p.html

I'm going to be sad to see that power station go. To me it's always been the equivalent to London's Battersea. I always thought it would make a pretty kick ass concert hall (not sure of the acoustics) or a cool, grungy kind of nightclub. I'm sure any type of conversion would take an obscene amount of money though. Oh well...

City design review committee tables FirstEnergy request to demolish Lake Shore power plant

 

By Steven Litt, The Plain Dealer

on December 03, 2015 at 11:24 AM, updated December 03, 2015 at 11:25 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio –The City's Downtown/Flats Design Review Committee quickly and unanimously tabled a request by FirstEnergy seeking approval to demolish its Lake Shore power plant just west of East 72nd Street.

 

Leo Slansky, senior project manager of Independence Demolition, the contracting firm representing the project at the meeting, said FirstEnergy wanted to move quickly because portions of the brick façade of the massive and architecturally impressive power plant are peeling away from the underlying steel framing.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/12/city_committee_tables_request.html

Man, I really wish something unique could be done with this building. Unfortunately, it's just too out of the way. I can't imagine it being saved.

City design review committee tables FirstEnergy request to demolish Lake Shore power plant

 

By Steven Litt, The Plain Dealer

on December 03, 2015 at 11:24 AM, updated December 03, 2015 at 11:25 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio –The City's Downtown/Flats Design Review Committee quickly and unanimously tabled a request by FirstEnergy seeking approval to demolish its Lake Shore power plant just west of East 72nd Street.

 

Leo Slansky, senior project manager of Independence Demolition, the contracting firm representing the project at the meeting, said FirstEnergy wanted to move quickly because portions of the brick façade of the massive and architecturally impressive power plant are peeling away from the underlying steel framing.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/12/city_committee_tables_request.html

 

This is exactly the kind of language you want to hear from your city planning director.

 

[slow clap gif]

 

"One of the things that immediately rang out to me was the actual context of the waterfront district plan and the prospects of adaptive re-use of the site," Collier said.

 

The city's 2004 waterfront district plan was the most comprehensive effort of its kind in 50 years. It calls for creating greater public access to Lake Erie from neighborhoods to the south of the lakefront highways and railroads, and stronger lateral connections running east west along the lakefront.

 

"I think it would be more than responsible for us to dialogue [with FirstEnergy] about adaptive reuse and salvage of part of the site," Collier said, adding that the architectural quality of the power plant and environmental remediation are big concerns for the city.

Better to make things as difficult as possible.  If this blocks development on those lots, then we have reached a new low.  I love the USS Cod but it takes up the entire shoreline, I don't see how development could tout waterfront access and have it.  Plenty of other places it could go.  Government inserts itself again.

 

USS Cod gains traction as Cleveland landmark, despite pushback from City Hall

 

A local landmark designation would apply to both the submarine and the half-acre piece of public property where it has been moored for more than 50 years. That means the Landmarks Commission would have veto power over any development proposal for the land or any request to relocate the vessel.

 

Assistant Law Director Jonathan McGory, who represents the city's airport system, stressed that the port control division respects the Cod and its history. But he questioned whether the land next to the Cod has any historic significance and asked the commission not to restrict the city's flexibility.

 

"We're not currently asking to move the Cod, right now, for development," he said, "but we are getting word from developers that they're interested in this parcel. ... We don't want to dismiss the Cod and all that it brings to the city of Cleveland. We just want to make sure that we have the ability to get the most out of our lakefront that we can."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/12/uss_cod_gains_traction_as_clev.html

^The Cod should be over by the Science Center anyway.  I don't know why they would resist a move to that area if the city helps them with the expenses.

I'm confused. Is the city asking the Cod to move to make way for development or is the city trying to designate the Cod and its site a landmark that will block development? Or is the city merely being vilified because it's "the guvmint" that's taking marching orders from others?

^The city is lobbying against landmark designation of the adjacent land, so that the Cod doesn't interfere with any future redevelopment possibilities for that site.

From what I can tell, there is a "threat" of redevelopment on the site.  This is the site that Geis has had under an option for years now.  Redeveloping it would probably require a move for the Cod given its size and position on the most valuable waterfront access on the site.  I'm assuming this has mobilized the interest group for the Cod which is now using the godd*mn guvment as a way to ensconce its interests and the godd*mn guvment is eager to oblige.

 

So yes, keeping the Cod in its place would drastically detract from a lakefront development on the site and may even make it unpalatable given the cost.  I am saying this as someone who loves the Cod and Cleveland history and would love to see the Cod remain an attraction.  But they have no right to use the government as a shield to protect themselves from making tradeoffs.  Keeping the Cod where it is comes with costs and benefits - and they should have to negotiate those like everyone else.  This gives them an offramp from those negotiations, or at least gives them a pretty nice shield.

 

EDIT: If Geis or other developers walk away because of this then shame shame shame.  And we'll still b*tch about an undeveloped lakefront.

I've been saying for years that the Cod should be moved closer to North Coast Harbor so that it can be better integrated with the other lakefront attractions. Below is the USS Torsk museum ship at Baltimore's Inner Harbor which is docked right across from the National Aquarium. I remember seeing this for the first time and wishing the Cod was similarly situated near the Rock Hall. I especially don't like how the Cod site is surrounded by a barbed wire fence.

 

If you (SixthCity) are going to b!tch about an undeveloped lakefront, could you at least wait until the big bad bogeyman "government" actually screws it up? Who knows -- maybe enough people will participate in THEIR government and provide it with a broader consensus of opinion to encourage that lakefront development will occur. And if that development doesn't go through, then apparently the consensus heard by "the government" is that the Cod site should be left as-is.

If you (SixthCity) are going to b!tch about an undeveloped lakefront, could you at least wait until the big bad bogeyman "government" actually screws it up? Who knows -- maybe enough people will participate in THEIR government and provide it with a broader consensus of opinion to encourage that lakefront development will occur. And if that development doesn't go through, then apparently the consensus heard by "the government" is that the Cod site should be left as-is.

 

If this gets landmarked, the opportunity cost of that decision, which you don't see upfront, will be huge.  You have removed private parties ability to negotiate with each other on equal footing.  That may or may not mean much to you but that is not how efficient decisions/tradeoffs get made - in business, in social relationships, and certainly in land use.  If it gets landmarked, the screw up has already occurred.

I especially don't like how the Cod site is surrounded by a barbed wire fence.

 

But barbed wire fencing is a hallmark of our coastline lol. That and industrial rubble...maybe those things should also get historic preservation status.