EDIT: I just realized this is TODAY -- and I just received the press release earlier today....

 

http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=11563

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

January 24, 2012

News Advisory

 

Cleveland’s Downtown Lakefront Community Meeting

 

CLEVELAND – On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 6:00 pm the City of Cleveland, its Planning Commission and the Department of Port Control will host a community meeting to review plans for the Downtown Lakefront at Old Stone Church. This meeting is open to the public and residents, stakeholders and media are encouraged to attend.

 

WHO: Robert Brown, Director, City Planning Commission

Ricky Smith, Director, Department of Port Control

WHAT: Community Meeting to review plans for the Downtown Lakefront

WHEN: Wednesday, January 25, 2012

6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

WHERE: Old Stone Church

91 Public Square (Enter through door at 1380 Ontario)

 

- 30 -

i sent an email but got no response. i was wondering if there was some special reason why the USS Cod couldn't be moored where the goodtime is. Does anyone know?

 

http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/CityofCleveland/Home/PressRelease/prdetail?id=11563

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

January 24, 2012

News Advisory

 

Cleveland’s Downtown Lakefront Community Meeting

 

CLEVELAND – On Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 6:00 pm the City of Cleveland, its Planning Commission and the Department of Port Control will host a community meeting to review plans for the Downtown Lakefront at Old Stone Church. This meeting is open to the public and residents, stakeholders and media are encouraged to attend.

 

WHO: Robert Brown, Director, City Planning Commission

Ricky Smith, Director, Department of Port Control

WHAT: Community Meeting to review plans for the Downtown Lakefront

WHEN: Wednesday, January 25, 2012

6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

WHERE: Old Stone Church

91 Public Square (Enter through door at 1380 Ontario)

 

- 30 -

 

hmm...anyone else going?  I may have some free time.

I'm thinking I might.

Any results

Most of what was said was in the PDF which was posted here not too long ago. 

 

Look for some things like the transient marinas, food trucks and restaurants on East 9th to happen quite soon, other things obviously to take somewhat longer, but this is not supposed to be a 50 year plan, they hope to have much of it start soon, market conditions willing, though development will have to be incremental.

 

The development between the RRHOF and GLSC will be inspired by the arcades and may be able to open or close itself to the elements depending on weather.

 

There should be more programming at Voinovich Park starting this year or next.  The marinas should include more commercial/charter boat traffic, too.

 

There is some possibility of connecting the Lakefront with the FEB, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

The Hulett folks are actively trying to get them included, placed next to the Mather.  I think it'd be great, the planners didn't seem so enthused.

 

 

Who was putting on the show? The city? The Browns?

Who was putting on the show? The city? The Browns?

 

It was the city of cleveland [bob Brown with the introduction][Ricky D. Smith, the head of the Port Control] and the one of the main architects from K&E whose name escapes me.

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3638.msg587124.html#msg587124

 

^ was correct on all accounts. As I understood, any development in this area will be limited to 4-5 stories, because of FAA regulations and to maintain a view of the lake from the mall.

 

X, Too bad I didn't run into you, I would have loved to run into you or another UOer !

 

In other news, I was pleasantly surprised that most of the audience's questions were actually very intelligent, knowledgeable, and in some cases, critical. A bit tired at the moment, I'll add some more later.

Article on Cleveland.com about the closing of several coal-fired electricity plants in Ohio and surrounding region.

 

Wasn't sure exactly where to post this but decided on this thread due to the Shoreway plant's proximity to the lake and how this could play into future development along that stretch from 55th to MLK. 

 

If you have a few minutes the video at the bottom of the story is worth the watch!  Good footage of the Shoreway plant coal being unloaded.  Also note the intense optimism for the region in terms of jobs and growth.  My how times have changed!

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/01/firstenergy_corp_to_shut_four.html

Article on Cleveland.com about the closing of several coal-fired electricity plants in Ohio and surrounding region.

 

Wasn't sure exactly where to post this but decided on this thread due to the Shoreway plant's proximity to the lake and how this could play into future development along that stretch from 55th to MLK. 

 

If you have a few minutes the video at the bottom of the story is worth the watch!  Good footage of the Shoreway plant coal being unloaded.  Also note the intense optimism for the region in terms of jobs and growth.  My how times have changed!

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/01/firstenergy_corp_to_shut_four.html

 

It's going to be strange not seeing all those seagulls on the shoreway. 

I've always wondered if those sites wouldn't be perfect for wind turbines. They're right next to electrical substations which should reduce a little bit of costs for FirstEnergy and right on the edge of the lake to get the lake breezes. Plus if the people that live nearby didn't have a problem living next to a coal power plant, it's hard to imagine they'd be to upset by having a wind turbine instead.

Will First Energy just be abandoning that building?  Another brownfield in Cleveland?

^Many times power house are  redeveloped, especially those in a prime location (like say a lake front).  Wasn't the Tate Modern in London a power house at one time?  So all you need is say $500-600 million and its a cinch.  Since this is Cleveland I would say look for this to happen about 2075 (given we have had a parking lot on Public Square for 20 years now).

If you have a few minutes the video at the bottom of the story is worth the watch!  Good footage of the Shoreway plant coal being unloaded.  Also note the intense optimism for the region in terms of jobs and growth.  My how times have changed!

 

That video is pure gold!!!

 

"The best location in the nation!"

^Many times power house are  redeveloped, especially those in a prime location (like say a lake front).

 

Maybe they could put an aquarium in there!

^Many times power house are  redeveloped, especially those in a prime location (like say a lake front). 

I like the look of the plant. In an industrial kindof way it's actually quite an attractive building (the brickwork and huge windows are nice). Add in that it's got a nice lake view and is just across E71st from Gordon Park and it's a valuable peice of property. I doubt FirstEnergy will let it go for a while in case EPA regulations let up (depending on who wins in Nov) and they can reopen it. But IMO they'd be crazy to not at least consider trying to come up with a value on it in case it should someday be redeveloped.

^Many times power house are  redeveloped, especially those in a prime location (like say a lake front).

Maybe they could put an aquarium in there!

:roll:

cynical me thinks that this is a ploy by first energy to say "Look Obama cost Ohio jobs" hoping that the laws will be relaxed and the plants will go back into service. 

I think the building is quite iconic. While driving west towards downtown on the freeway, you make the bend around the plant and you get your first great view of the skyline. Traveling east away from downtown, you see the massive plant in the distance straight ahead, which can look quite amazing. If you really focus on it, it looks larger than life from a distance.

cynical me thinks that this is a ploy by first energy to say "Look Obama cost Ohio jobs" hoping that the laws will be relaxed and the plants will go back into service. 

 

I doubt that, as it's not just plants in ohio that are affected.  there are approximately 30 plants across the country closing.

^Many times power house are  redeveloped, especially those in a prime location (like say a lake front). 

I like the look of the plant. In an industrial kindof way it's actually quite an attractive building (the brickwork and huge windows are nice). Add in that it's got a nice lake view and is just across E71st from Gordon Park and it's a valuable peice of property. I doubt FirstEnergy will let it go for a while in case EPA regulations let up (depending on who wins in Nov) and they can reopen it. But IMO they'd be crazy to not at least consider trying to come up with a value on it in case it should someday be redeveloped.

 

All this time I thought that was a Cleveland Public Power plant. I had to search online to prove you were wrong and I was right, but I see I was wr, wr.... wrong. :)

With the Superbowl being played in Indy this weekend, the topic on 92.3 The Fan has been Lakefront Development: Why is CLE missing out while Detroit and smaller market Indy get the superbowl? They say 18,000 hotel rooms are filled in Indy, providing 80 million to the local economy.

 

The consensus among the hosts and callers is that the stadium was a rush job and not well situated among its surroundings. Hard to argue there, we all know that's true.  It is refreshing to hear "regular guy" sports fans making insightful comments on the subject though.

 

The hosts, Andy Baskin and Jeff Phelps, note that aside from the huge, obvious advantage of having a roof, in Indy the stadium is within an easy walk to other attractions and hotels. But in CLE the stadium is too isolated from hotels.  In Detroit, Ford Field is often open to the public, but unless there's a game CLE Stadium is no draw whatsoever.  They realize the tremendous potential with Science Center and Rock Hall, but unlike Indy or Baltimore Inner Harbor, there is a disconnect between our attractions; the pieces don't fit together.

 

Developer Bob Corna was interviewed. He's a longtime retractable roof advocate, I remember he was laughed out of town years ago for his suggestion. He's arguing (rather effectively) that Lucas Oil in Indy is utilized 240 times a year vs. 11 times for Cleveland Stadium.  That's unacceptable, and CLE must make investments to correct this issue.

 

Corna has spoken to Mike Holmgren, who has been very receptive. The league is most certainly going to 18 games a year, and that will mean more cold weather games that could be played under a roof; attendance in bad weather is a concern for them. Personally, it's strange how the Lakefront is in perpetual "recovery mode" from past mistakes. Some day we'll do things right the first time!

 

As for general Lakefront Development, Corna reiterated that the Browns aren't developers, again, the Browns shiny lakefront plan is merely suggestion.  Randy Lerner might still take a more active role, I doubt it...we'll see. 

 

New topic: Retractable see-through roof! Hmm.....

 

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/

^The economic and urban planning side of brain says a retractable roof would be a great addition, especially with its proximity to the Convention Center which could lead to spillover events.  The football side of my brain says the Browns don't play under a roof.  The Browns are a tough, cold weather, outdoor team.  I lump the Browns in there with other tough cold weather teams like Green Bay, Chicago, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc.  It's just a nostalgia thing, but I'm really not sure I want to see a rectractable roof on Cleveland Browns stadium.  We're tougher than those wimps in Indianapolis, Detroit, St. Louis and Minnesota.

Put a lid on it!

 

Here's a couple of images from 5-7 years ago (whenever it was) when I wrote an article about Corna promoting putting a lid on Browns Stadium. The one photo is mine, showing how desolate some of the areas are around Browns Stadium. The lot in the foreground was the site of Cleveland's Union Depot from 1853 to 1930, after which it was used only by the Pennsylvania Railroad for its secondary Cleveland station until 1953......

 

 

The pd wrote about this a couple weeks ago when addressing the browns request for five million dollars. I think most 'regular' guys acknowledge the stadiums underuse.

no dome...football in the elements.

It isn't about football. It's about paying $300 million plus maintenance for something that sits empty 350+ days a year.

Close the roof during the 350 days its not being used to protect the stadium.  Open it for games  :-D

^The economic and urban planning side of brain says a retractable roof would be a great addition, especially with its proximity to the Convention Center which could lead to spillover events.  The football side of my brain says the Browns don't play under a roof.  The Browns are a tough, cold weather, outdoor team.  I lump the Browns in there with other tough cold weather teams like Green Bay, Chicago, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc.  It's just a nostalgia thing, but I'm really not sure I want to see a rectractable roof on Cleveland Browns stadium.  We're tougher than those wimps in Indianapolis, Detroit, St. Louis and Minnesota.

 

Agreed, but it's probably a moot point.  I don't see where the money could possibly come from at this point.

I hear the hosting a Superbowl argument too much as a reason to build a roof. I think the using it over 200 times a year compared to 10 is a better point to make. Yes the NFL might reward us with a superbowl for building a dome, but we still wouldn't be part of the rotation, just like Detroits not. It would be a one time thing, and definitely not worth the $80+ million for just one game.

I hear the hosting a Superbowl argument too much as a reason to build a roof. I think the using it over 200 times a year compared to 10 is a better point to make. Yes the NFL might reward us with a superbowl for building a dome, but we still wouldn't be part of the rotation, just like Detroits not. It would be a one time thing, and definitely not worth the $80+ million for just one game.

 

Yep.  Hosting a Superbowl would be nice, but does it have any plans to come back to Indianapolis after this?  Yes, it's a nice stadium, but Miami and Phoenix are always going to be favored. 

 

As far as Brown Stadium goes, I am really not a fan.  I think it looks cheap and was built quickly without any thought process behind it besides bringing the Browns back to Cleveland (which obviously is/was very important).  We have this big orange bowl that sits on a largely vacant lakefront.  Like most, I am highly skeptical we will even see any lakefront development in many decades to come. 

If MLS would get over its stupid small, soccer-only stadium rule, CBS could very easily get a lot more use.

 

The really annoying thing about a big stadium is that when empty, it hogs up so much space, but when full, it's an extreme dis-amenity for uses that aren't compatible with hordes of drunk people and 20,000 cars.

The MLS rule makes sense to me. I would like the stadium to be used more, but I dont think the MLS would ever work in that stadium.

The MLS rule makes sense to me. I would like the stadium to be used more, but I dont think the MLS would ever work in that stadium.

 

Not unless we suddenly became as soccer crazy as England.  The new stadiums over there are similar size and design of most football stadiums.  New England Revelation play in Gillette Stadium (Kraft owns the team so it make sense from a business standpoint) and it is incredibly empty due to it is designed to hold 65K+, instead of the 10K or so that show up (NE is a terrible team and Gillette stadium is in a terrible location, average attendance is around 17K across the league). 

 

I think Seattle holds their games in the Seahawks Stadium, but they are crazy for their futbol there.  I think they get upwards of 35K to each game.

I'm the one who started this tangent, so I'll do my part by suggesting that any further discussion of using the stadium for MLS soccer go in this appropriate thread: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7469.270.html

ok...  this is just an idea that popped in my head concerning the stadium dome conversation...  I remember the talk about a dome on CBS before and the prohibitive cost makes that something that may not happen in the near future...  I have no idea if this would be architecturally feasible, but what about a cover above the lower bowl only...    not sure of the seating capacity of the lower bowl, but maybe 40K and I think it would include some suites... 

ok...  this is just an idea that popped in my head concerning the stadium dome conversation...  I remember the talk about a dome on CBS before and the prohibitive cost makes that something that may not happen in the near future...  I have no idea if this would be architecturally feasible, but what about a cover above the lower bowl only...    not sure of the seating capacity of the lower bowl, but maybe 40K and I think it would include some suites... 

 

Intriguing. If you could build that at say a fraction of the cost, you still have the Browns outside. But then you have the roof for smaller events and as a natural spur for the convention center. Cheaper to heat too. Worth considering this option if the price is right.

 

 

^The economic and urban planning side of brain says a retractable roof would be a great addition, especially with its proximity to the Convention Center which could lead to spillover events.  The football side of my brain says the Browns don't play under a roof.  The Browns are a tough, cold weather, outdoor team.  I lump the Browns in there with other tough cold weather teams like Green Bay, Chicago, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc.  It's just a nostalgia thing, but I'm really not sure I want to see a rectractable roof on Cleveland Browns stadium.  We're tougher than those wimps in Indianapolis, Detroit, St. Louis and Minnesota.

 

I'd hate to see the Browns become a "dome" team. I was surprised to hear that it's the NFL that controls whether the roof is open or closed. Perhaps if the Browns could keep the decision theirs it would be easier to accept.

 

The more I think about it, the more I like Lockdog's "low ceiling" idea. That would still allow enough seats for MAC football championship, soccer, college bowl games and convention use.

 

Those 240 dates/year at Lucas Oil Stadium is a real eye opener.  I'd like to see a study on what our Stadium could expect in "closed roof" event revenues.

You can't really put a roof, plus all the mechanisms and swing space for the retracting dome, in the middle of the stadium.  And why would it would be any cheaper?

I was thinking the same as in where would the mechanics go and where would the roof go while closed if they only closed in the lower level.it can disappear so it would inevitable block the view from the upper decks.

I think an open/close dome would be fantastic. But I think it should be left for the next iteration of Cleveland Browns Stadium. This one is already a staggering 12 years old...by NFL standards, they'll be arguing for a new one around 2025. The expense is considerable, given what Randy Lerner will require the city to contribute...I'd rather we not tax ourselves any earlier than we need to. Maybe the benefits of the dome would justify moving up new construction, I don't know. Another option would be to model it after CenturyLink Field in Seattle, which has a roof that covers most of the seats but not the field.

 

CBS cost 373M in adjusted dollars, Lucas Oil (retractable dome) cost 735M, Cowboys Stadium (partially retractable dome) cost 1.3B (!!!!), Ford Field (non-opening dome) 525M, CenturyLink was around 400M. So, we got a bargain, but maybe not the one that would pay for itself in the best way.

You can't really put a roof, plus all the mechanisms and swing space for the retracting dome, in the middle of the stadium.  And why would it would be any cheaper?

 

What about something similar to the dome over the CSU soccer field.  Something flexible that can be removed easily.  Use wires from the roof to hold up the middle then attach it around the edges.

^Sorry but do that and I see a Cleveland joke in the making.

As an allied-industry insider, I found the statistic on the usage of Lucas Oil Stadium suspicious.  From their website, check out the event calendar for 2012.  Maybe it's post-Superbowl hangover, but it looks like a good part of the days booked for the rest of the year are your run of the mill (well for the 1%) weddings, barmitzvahs, proms and socials:

 

http://www.lucasoilstadium.com/upcoming-events.aspx

 

Cleveland Browns stadium does rent out their indoor spaces for these sorts of events with similar success:

 

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/private-events/index.html.html

 

I didn't see any listed on the CBS event calendar, but then again I didn't see ANY events listed.  Could be that the Browns choose not to publicize their barmitvah rentals.  :)  My point is maybe the dome is unneeded to attract new business to the stadium.  They should be competing with the Rock Hall and Science Center for spillover party rental business from corporate Cleveland.

 

 

As an allied-industry insider, I found the statistic on the usage of Lucas Oil Stadium suspicious.  From their website, check out the event calendar for 2012.  Maybe it's post-Superbowl hangover, but it looks like a good part of the days booked for the rest of the year are your run of the mill (well for the 1%) weddings, barmitzvahs, proms and socials:

 

http://www.lucasoilstadium.com/upcoming-events.aspx

 

Cleveland Browns stadium does rent out their indoor spaces for these sorts of events with similar success:

 

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/private-events/index.html.html

 

I didn't see any listed on the CBS event calendar, but then again I didn't see ANY events listed.  Could be that the Browns choose not to publicize their barmitvah rentals.  :)  My point is maybe the dome is unneeded to attract new business to the stadium.  They should be competing with the Rock Hall and Science Center for spillover party rental business from corporate Cleveland.

 

 

 

Speaking of which we looked into holding the reception for our wedding at CBS, very briefly as it was crazy expensive.  But I am sure that there are a large number of events that are held in the stadium each year.  It looks like they basically make the whole stadium available,a nd as there is no schedule who knows how much use it is actually getting.

 

^Sorry but do that and I see a Cleveland joke in the making.

 

Hah, if they put it up during the games I would agree, but I see it as an economical solution for the other 3/4 of the year there is no football.

I think an open/close dome would be fantastic. But I think it should be left for the next iteration of Cleveland Browns Stadium. This one is already a staggering 12 years old...by NFL standards, they'll be arguing for a new one around 2025*. ...

Relocate a mile or two inland.  With the season stretched into January, football at Cleveland Browns Stadium is akin to ice fishing on Lake Erie.  Imagine if we were in the playoffs with 20 mph winds and nine degree temperatures at game time.

 

Cincinnati Riverfront Stadium was only 32 years old when they crushed it.

Quote from: Htsguy on Today at 11:34:35 AM

 

    ^Sorry but do that and I see a Cleveland joke in the making.

 

 

Hah, if they put it up during the games I would agree, but I see it as an economical solution for the other 3/4 of the year there is no football.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3638.900.html#ixzz1lADCqdty

 

I cannot see how making an open air stadium usable for more than large events would make cleveland a joke...  if it only covers the lower bowl then it would obviously be inflatable and not a retractable dome...

 

Okay lockdog I guess I will have to explain my comment.

 

Niko was suggesting a cheaper alternative to "doming" Cleveland Browns Stadium since many of the other posters indicated that there is no money for this and it is very likely cost prohibitive.

 

I reflected that Niko's suggestion was a Cleveland joke in the making since so many other cites have these expensive and elaborate retractable roofs, and Cleveland would have a baggie over its stadium.  I could see Jay Leno having a field day.

Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald promises economic development in State of County address

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cuyahoga County will use its share of casino taxes to remake Cleveland's lakefront, county Executive Ed FitzGerald said today in his second State of the County speech.

 

One of 12 points in what FitzGerald described as a "Western Reserve Plan," the proposal calls for the county to partner with nonprofit agencies, companies and other local governments to redevelop downtown and the shoreline.

 

About $18 million could be devoted to the area to draw tourists and businesses, once the Horseshoe Casino Cleveland and three other Ohio casinos are open.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2012/02/cuyahoga_county_executive_promises_economic_development.html