A reposting of my comment on Cleveland.bomb:

 

Here's my idea to create a draw and compliment the surroundings:

 

- Mid-rise Residential (for a 24-hr feel to the area/feet on the street)

- Cleveland Sports Museum (how appropriate next to First Energy Stadium...Browns, Indians, Cavs, Jesse Owens, etc)

- Superman Museum (long over due!)

- Rebuild the Amtrak station (preferably into a multi-modal usage)..add coffee shop/cafe?

- Downtown elementary school (great idea!)

- cafes, restaurants, bars, retail

 

I'm unsure of the soundstage/movie set idea, since I fear it'd take up too much vauable space. There are hundreds of places this could go in Cleveland...probably for much cheaper. 

 

I'd put Office space as minimal on my priority list. There should definitely be some, but it should not dominate the mixed-use.

 

I agree with your vision.  I too would rather see minimal office development along the Lakefront.  I'd rather continue the focus on reviving office space in some of the existing empty buildings, most notably in the E. 9th/Playhouse Sq area.

^Gotta have a hotel in there too---something like 200-300 rooms.

I agree with your vision.  I too would rather see minimal office development along the Lakefront.  I'd rather continue the focus on reviving office space in some of the existing empty buildings, most notably in the E. 9th/Playhouse Sq area.

 

Besides, Geis is trying to push ahead with his development over by Burke. And Wolstein is trying to add another office building by Flats East Bank. If vacancies in the CBD were below 10 percent for Class A space, then I'd feel more positive. Instead it's above 16 percent in the CBD and pretty weak overall throughout NE Ohio......

http://www.colliers.com/~/media/Files/MarketResearch/UnitedStates/MARKETS/Ohio/Cleveland/Research/2013/Q22013-Cleveland_All-MarketReport.ashx

^True. But *some* office development should be created. It will be a unique location. Such a cool location may incentivize a company to open there when they otherwise wouldn't be operating in the city at all. I guess, i want it all:

 

office

hotel

condos

apartments

some cheap restaurants, including 24-hr diners

some nice restaurants

retail to support living (laundromat, grocery store, drug stores, etc.)

some other retail

maybe one or two 'attractions' like museums but nothing overwhelming

school (CMSD)

some kind of art/film institute

 

 

Laundromat and school, cheap restaurants and grocery store on the damn waterfront? Ok, this sounds more like Cleveland.com than urbanohio.com

A reposting of my comment on Cleveland.bomb:

 

Here's my idea to create a draw and compliment the surroundings:

 

- Mid-rise Residential (for a 24-hr feel to the area/feet on the street)

- Cleveland Sports Museum (how appropriate next to First Energy Stadium...Browns, Indians, Cavs, Jesse Owens, etc)

- Superman Museum (long over due!)

- Rebuild the Amtrak station (preferably into a multi-modal usage)..add coffee shop/cafe?

- Downtown elementary school (great idea!)

- cafes, restaurants, bars, retail

 

I'm unsure of the soundstage/movie set idea, since I fear it'd take up too much vauable space. There are hundreds of places this could go in Cleveland...probably for much cheaper. 

 

I'd put Office space as minimal on my priority list. There should definitely be some, but it should not dominate the mixed-use.

 

 

I've always felt that the lakefront should be about family-oriented, interactive museums, while university circle should be the more serious museums.  thats why i wanted the aquarium on the lakefront.  So, i agree with the sports and superman museums.

For the waterfront , i envision a recognizable chain sports restaurant venue (Champps, Hooters) , residential condo/apts, two tourist friendly recognizable chain restaurants ( Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville Bar & Grill and Cheesecake Factory) seasonal eateries and shops like "Honey Hut", "Slymann's , "Melt", " Hot Sauce Williams",  a souvenir shop, bike rental shop, paddle boat shop) last a superhero/comic book museum.

. Laundromat and school' date=' cheap restaurants and grocery store on the damn waterfront? Ok, this sounds more like Cleveland.com than urbanohio.com.[/quote']

 

You really want people to live without a grocery store and a school? and places for a quick bite to eat instead of eating at $30-$40 dinners/lunches every day? To have a truly vibrant neighborhood, in addition to nice restaurants/bars, you still need a chipotle or place like Nate's on 25th---it can't all be fancy restaurants so that people who live there can't get a quick bite for themselves without having to get in their car and go somewhere else. I'm not advocating a McDonalds or any crappy fast food---but places other than ONLY fancy restaurants. But certainly NOT this!:

 

For the waterfront ' date=' i envision a recognizable chain sports restaurant venue (Champps, Hooters)[/quote']

 

 

 

I just don't see a school or grocery store on the lakefront. It makes sense to build a huge grocery store and maybe even place a school in the dead areas along St. Clair or Lakeside below 30th. The lakefront is high end or entertainment based in my head. The condo/apt would be priced on the higher end.

I just don't see a school or grocery store on the lakefront. It makes sense to build a huge grocery store and maybe even place a school in the dead areas along St. Clair or Lakeside below 30th. The lakefront is high end or entertainment based in my head. The condo/apt would be priced on the higher end.

 

Sorry. I forgot that people who live in higher end condos/apartments do not need to eat food. You're right. Bring on the sports bar.

 

^^ Well, technically there already is a good school there ... Currently, the fairly high-performing MC2STEM CMSD high school starts their 9th grade class off at the Great Lakes Science Center before they move on to other campuses. Probably 80 or 90 kids over there. I don't think an enormous school would work there, but I do think a high-performing magnet or charter could def do well. In terms of grocery, I think it really depends on how dense this development ends up being ... I don't feel like that's a very intuitive spot for the vast majority of downtown workers or residents to do grocery shopping, and I don't think day visitors are typically thinking about full grocery shopping on a visit to the lakefront. For anything but a very small boutique grocery, I think you would need a pretty dense residential base to support a grocery.

 

In Cleveland, we seem to use Baltimore Harbor a lot as a point of inspiration (http://goo.gl/maps/8Clnp), but I feel like that city's waterfront is much less physically separated from the city core than ours. Not to say that vibrant mixed-use isn't possible on this site ... It's got some great visitor attractions already baked in that will help generate pedestrian volume. But no matter how strong we make our pedestrian and rail connections, I still think the psychological barriers presented by the Shoreway increase the likelihood that this needs to be sustainable primarily as an island unto itself, rather than relying on spillover traffic from downtown population to its south. In some ways, I feel like Toronto (http://goo.gl/maps/MBSdo), which has a similar Shoreway configuration, presents a more realistic outcome for the Cleve ... a strong emphasis on waterfront trails and parks and visitor attractions, lots of residential and hotel, some office and relatively light retail, with some stand-alone chain, some more mom-and-pop/small restaurant on Queens Quay and an emphasis on more booth-type, temporary, indie sales stuff ... Which seems to work well for seasonal variations in visitation.

I addressed grocery stores within a short drive or transit ride. If you go to Baltimore's Inner Harbor, you have a food court inside of a pavilion, but those who live there do their shopping at grocery stores in the city, not at the harbor. We can agree to disagree, two different visions.

Let's agree that if downtown adds another 4000 residents on the lakefront, that hopefully we would get a grocery store bigger than Constantino's SOMEWHERE downtown.  And even then, such a store would probably rely heavily on lunchtime customers eating prepared foods.    This is not SIM city.  It is Cleveland.

Whatever happens, I want something that embraces and is premised upon the fact that it is a WATERFRONT.  Start from there and build a design that capitalized first on the location and then takes other factors into account.  There is no sense in building something there that can go pretty much anywhere else there is available land.  We already learned that lesson with the stadium and the shoreway

A reposting of my comment on Cleveland.bomb:

 

Here's my idea to create a draw and compliment the surroundings:

 

- Mid-rise Residential (for a 24-hr feel to the area/feet on the street)

- Cleveland Sports Museum (how appropriate next to First Energy Stadium...Browns, Indians, Cavs, Jesse Owens, etc)

- Superman Museum (long over due!)

- Rebuild the Amtrak station (preferably into a multi-modal usage)..add coffee shop/cafe?

- Downtown elementary school (great idea!)

- cafes, restaurants, bars, retail

 

I'm unsure of the soundstage/movie set idea, since I fear it'd take up too much vauable space. There are hundreds of places this could go in Cleveland...probably for much cheaper. 

 

I'd put Office space as minimal on my priority list. There should definitely be some, but it should not dominate the mixed-use.

 

 

I agree with your vision.  I too would rather see minimal office development.  I'd rather continue the focus on reviving some of the existing empty office buildings, most notably in the E. 9th/Playhouse Sq area.

Whatever happens, I want something that embraces and is premised upon the fact that it is a WATERFRONT.  Start from there and build a design that capitalized first on the location and then takes other factors into account.  There is no sense in building something there that can go pretty much anywhere else there is available land.  We already learned that lesson with the stadium and the shoreway

 

This is precisely the reason why it's sooo important that the developers understand the unique nature of coastal development. From the track records of the names thrown around I'm not yet optimistic.

I realize that when I say a grocery store in an urban district, some folks necessarily are thinking of a giant suburban giant eagle or something. For the Lakefront, I'm talking about a store where you can buy groceries (think Trader Joes in NY Union Square) that you can take home and cook, instead of always buying restaurant food. Didn't realize this would be such a difficult concept. If you don't want people to be able to buy food, then why advocate a bunch of housing?

You're vastly, vastly underestimating the population required to sustain a grocery store.  Some old rule of thumb numbers I remember from planning school are that it takes approximately 25,000 people to support a full service grocery, and even 12-15,000 for a convenient store.  Of course, Downtown can rely on non resident traffic, but how many people are going to the Lakefront to grocery shop?  It wouldn't even be convenient for other Downtown residents or workers.  So sorry, but chances of a grocery store on the Lakefront are basically nil.

Whatever happens, I want something that embraces and is premised upon the fact that it is a WATERFRONT.  Start from there and build a design that capitalized first on the location and then takes other factors into account.  There is no sense in building something there that can go pretty much anywhere else there is available land.  We already learned that lesson with the stadium and the shoreway

 

I agree.  All of this talk of placing this and that on the waterfront, no mention of waterfront vistas, lookouts...places to interact with the water.  Planning should start from that premise and branch out from there.  Maybe these themes will come more in focus as they flesh out their plans, but this area has to be a place where you first enjoy the water and the scenery in a unique way that's only available in Downtown Cleveland...and secondly offers unique things to do to keep you there and coming back (museums, apts, retail, etc).

September 06. 2013 11:01AM

Cleveland again misses out on federal money for lakefront walking bridge

By JAY MILLER

 

The city of Cleveland again was unsuccessful in winning a federal transportation grant for a pedestrian bridge that would connect the lakefront museums with the Mall and the new convention center downtown.

The bridge is a key piece in the $350 million downtown development plan announced by Mayor Frank Jackson and Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald in June.

The U.S. Department of Transportation announced 52 projects that will share $474 million in so-called TIGER grant funds. A $17 million grant the city and Cuyahoga County sought for the bridge and an attached parking garage was not among the winning projects. The grant would have helped lakefront planners raise additional money for the lakefront plan. Neither Mayor Jackson nor Mr. FitzGerald were immediately available for comment.

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20130906/FREE/130909880?template=mobile&X-IgnoreUserAgent=1

You're vastly, vastly underestimating the population required to sustain a grocery store.  Some old rule of thumb numbers I remember from planning school are that it takes approximately 25,000 people to support a full service grocery, and even 12-15,000 for a convenient store.  Of course, Downtown can rely on non resident traffic, but how many people are going to the Lakefront to grocery shop?  It wouldn't even be convenient for other Downtown residents or workers.  So sorry, but chances of a grocery store on the Lakefront are basically nil.

 

A comparison would be Stonebridge on the West Bank of the Flats. I think if something on the scale of this multi-building development was built on the lakefront, many of us would probably be very pleased. Yet the only "grocer" is a very small convenience store in the converted machine shop with basics like pop, snacks, a few cleaning supplies, etc. The store is roughly the size of two cars parked side-by-side.

^^It appears, after three tries, that if the city and county really want this to become a reality they are going to have to look for another source of funding.  The article makes it clear that these grants are very competitive and that this type of project gets a very low ranking. 

^^It appears, after three tries, that if the city and county really want this to become a reality they are going to have to look for another source of funding.  The article makes it clear that these grants are very competitive and that this type of project gets a very low ranking. 

 

They are probably going to have to pay for it themselves. The city has called this the Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center, but's its really just a walkway with a parking deck in the middle of it. Having doorways in the parking deck that open up in the directions of the Amtrak station and the GCRTA Waterfront Line station don't constitute intermodalism. The US Department of Transportation has seen through that each time, yet the city keeps submitting the same project. All Aboard Ohio supports this project, but it could be so much better if the city worked a little more closely with Amtrak and GCRTA to incorporate some low-cost linkages to them, much of which Amtrak was willing to pay for.

^^It appears, after three tries, that if the city and county really want this to become a reality they are going to have to look for another source of funding.  The article makes it clear that these grants are very competitive and that this type of project gets a very low ranking. 

 

They are probably going to have to pay for it themselves. The city has called this the Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center, but's its really just a walkway with a parking deck in the middle of it. Having doorways in the parking deck that open up in the directions of the Amtrak station and the GCRTA Waterfront Line station don't constitute intermodalism. The US Department of Transportation has seen through that each time, yet the city keeps submitting the same project. All Aboard Ohio supports this project, but it could be so much better if the city worked a little more closely with Amtrak and GCRTA to incorporate some low-cost linkages to them, much of which Amtrak was willing to pay for.

 

I'd really like to see something a little more ambitious in design and functionality. At least now there's maybe a chance of improvement. After all the gerbil tube may be short-sighted plan with Skywalk-esque results if the Shoreway is ever actually converted to a more friendly boulevard.

 

Perhaps a comprehensive look at all factors including future development and Shoreway restructuring would be wise. For instance, what other infrastructural solutions are there to bringing downtown and the lake together? Make it realistic; I remember a few hyper ambitious though unrealistic concepts out there.

The problem? NortheastOhio continues to be represented in Washington by people who have very little influence as to where the money goes. Historically Cleveland gets back very little of the money that we contribute. Other regions who are better connected politically continue to reap the benefits of federal money.

 

Here are a few examples of the grants that were approved. Clevelands application was no more or less worthwhile than the others.

Nationally, the grants range from $18 million for Atlanta to continue developing a city-circling beltway along an old railroad corridor to $20 million for Kansas City to develop a downtown streetcar to $10 million for Indianapolis to continue converting its bus fleet to electrical vehicles.

 

And if you really want to be annoyed go thru all of the projects. Very irritating.

http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/TIGER_2013_FactSheets_0.pdf

^Looking through those projects just highlighted how weak the Cleveland application was, IMHO.

^Looking through those projects just highlighted how weak the Cleveland application was, IMHO.

 

Yep. This is what All Aboard Ohio had to say about it a few months ago......

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2013/06/05/aao-on-cleveland-lakefront-development/

 

And our suggestions on how to improve the basic project in later phases. The widened Amtrak platform could be used from the overhead walkway to directly access either the West 3rd or East 9th Waterfront Line stations.......

 

^I want that.

The best part is, with the Amtrak station relocated into the parking deck, the current site of the station (owned by the city with a sewage lifting device right next to it) would be an ideal development site as all sorts of infrastructure and access points are present. In fact, I would suspect that a TIF from developing that site could pay a big chunk of the $17 million need to pay the missing amount necessary for the rest of the proposed transportation center.

Very nice KJP.

Progress toward developing Cleveland waterfront is reassuring even if gaps remain: editorial

By Editorial Board

on September 11, 2013 at 6:55 PM, updated September 11, 2013 at 10:03 PM

 

It's always a kick to watch television coverage of a Cleveland Browns game and see cutaway shots of the city's skyline rising from the shores of Lake Erie.

 

It informs those who don't live here that Cleveland has a lakefront and a re-energized downtown and reminds those who do live here that we need to make both more attractive and accessible to the public.

 

It's encouraging that five development teams recently submitted their qualifications to the city for the right to build around North Coast Harbor or at the site of reclaimed docks north of Browns Stadium, an area now called Harbor West.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/developer_interest_in_clevelan.html

Funding found for Phase 3 of the west shoreway project. http://fox8.com/2013/09/24/from-dream-to-reality-lakefront-west-project/

Funding found for Phase 3 of the west shoreway project. http://fox8.com/2013/09/24/from-dream-to-reality-lakefront-west-project/

 

Discussed here.....

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3301.0.html

Burke Lakefront Airport getting face-lift

 

By Daryl V. Rowland

Special to the Beacon Journal

Published: October 17, 2013 - 07:47 PM

 

CLEVELAND: Burke Lakefront Airport, the public airport located on the waterfront in downtown Cleveland, is undergoing exterior renovations to be completed in the next several weeks.

 

Improvements include repainting the terminal building, removing the canopy covering the front terminal walkway, redoing the landscaping, and adding window tinting and new LED lighting on a building exterior facade and walkway.

 

http://www.ohio.com/business/burke-lakefront-airport-getting-face-lift-1.437700

 

Port Control is  looking to move the Fire Dept at BKL from the west of the airport to Aviation High School, at the east end of the airport "due to....initiatives associated with the City of Cleveland's Lakefront Development Program." Posted an SOQ on their website two days ago.

 

http://www.clevelandairport.com/Doing-Business/Bids---RFPs-(1)/Burke-Lakefront-Airport-ARFF---CMF-Relocation-RFQ.aspx  (page 4)

 

[crossposted on BKL thread.]

Pursuit of downtown pedestrian bridge to Cleveland's lakefront resumes

By JAY MILLER

1:50 pm, November 20, 2013

 

A long-discussed pedestrian bridge that would link the new convention center in downtown Cleveland with the lakefront is being pursued once again following the project’s failure to win a federal transportation grant in September.

 

The bridge is a key piece in the $350 million downtown development plan announced last June by Mayor Frank Jackson and Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald. Although they still are struggling to put together a financing package for the project, the pair has submitted to their respective legislative councils a cooperative agreement for the planned convention center hotel that includes a financial commitment from each government for the bridge.

 

The hotel would be built adjacent to the convention center and Global Center for Health Innovation on the site of the recently vacated county administration building.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20131120/FREE/131129970

________

 

A way to fund it....

 

Ohio’s 4 busiest stations: outgrowing their past, expanding for their future

kjprendergast on November 13, 2013

 

To achieve ADA compliance, a state of good repair and reduce rail travel times, varying levels of investment are proposed at the following stations (owners listed):

 

+ Toledo MLK Plaza (Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority) – $5.4 million

+ Sandusky New York Central Depot (City of Sandusky) – $2.7 million

+ Elyria Lorain County Transportation Center (Lorain County) – $5 million to $6 million

+ Cleveland Lakefront Multi-modal Transportation Center (City of Cleveland) – $55.6 million

 

Of the estimated total of $69.7 million for all four station projects, up to $38 million in funding from Amtrak, Lorain County (via a federal grant) and the City of Cleveland has been pledged. Another $32 million appears to be needed. Funding should be sought from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to fill this gap so these four stations can become community focal points for multi-modal transportation and economic development. The FRA requires only a 20 percent non-federal match. A Toledo-Cleveland Corridor project could offer as much as a 55 percent non-federal match.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://allaboardohio.org/2013/11/13/ohios-4-busiest-stations/

^So I'm guessing the transportation center idea isn't being looked at as long as they are only looking for funds just a pedestrian bridge?

The pedestrian bridge is just weird to me. Seems like a very long, isolated walk.

 

 

The covered walkway seems awkward and would feel especially isolated.

Looks like something I would make with Legos.  We definitely need to connect the the mall, convention center, and hotel with the lakefront and paying $5 to ride a tram is not the best idea, but is walking down a zigzag tunnel bridge much better?

The Cleveland design competition had a  contest a few years ago to design a train station.  A few designs had the station entrance up on Lakeside and truly tied the mall area with the lakefront.  I realize this is a huge step from a pedestrian bridge, but if we can drop a cool $400+ million on a convention center, med mart, and hotel, whats a few more on game-changing station.

http://clevelandcompetition.com/past-competitions/2009-lakefront-station/

 

http://clevelandcompetition.com/portfolio/2009-lakefront-station-093174/

It would be interesting to see if a building could be built over the rail road tracks on the western side of East 9th. Maybe another on that lot north of rapid station. That would create an actual urban connection on the street, rather than some long isolated pedestrian bridge.

I have never been thrilled with the design of the bridge as well and am kinda glad they keep coming up short when applying for grants.  There needs to be a connection but it should also be done right.

^ Those designs are awesome, though obviously not very feasible. But still, we need to do better than that ugly walkway.

I know I have posted this photo before but with Ed Fitzgerald suggesting we recognize the Great Lakes Exposition in some way, replicating the bridge that stood for a couple of years would seem to be the perfect way to do it. Built for a cost of 80k it was a great addition at that time. Of course now there are a few more obstacles to hurdle like the horrible oddly placed (why it wasn't built closer to e9th so it would better connect with the street) Amtrak station, but it could be a temporary fix that would also honor the past.  I am all for the current proposal but financing seems to be an issue that will be tough to overcome. I am sure cooperate donors and naming rights could be the solution for this connection.

^The idea for the new Great Lakes Expo is to make actual buildings, not tear-down buildings like they did 100 years ago.  That being said, maybe we can pitch the idea of holding off on a bridge until we can use the Expo as an excuse to pump a bit more cash into an actual great design.

^ Keep in mind inflation and the fact that that bridge was built with cheap materials, with the intention of it lasting for only a small amount of time. So, building a bridge like that would be MUCH more expensive now.

 

I would love something that continued the mall over the tracks, in a certain way. I really like this proposal:

http://clevelandcompetition.com/portfolio/2009-lakefront-station-09377/

will the great lakes expo happen if he is governor?

I know I have posted this photo before but with Ed Fitzgerald suggesting we recognize the Great Lakes Exposition in some way, replicating the bridge that stood for a couple of years would seem to be the perfect way to do it. Built for a cost of 80k it was a great addition at that time. Of course now there are a few more obstacles to hurdle like the horrible oddly placed (why it wasn't built closer to e9th so it would better connect with the street) Amtrak station, but it could be a temporary fix that would also honor the past.  I am all for the current proposal but financing seems to be an issue that will be tough to overcome. I am sure cooperate donors and naming rights could be the solution for this connection.

 

Agreed this design is much much better than the tube.

Yeah, because the distance from the mall to the science center is so long, the bridge needs to have some sort of stops along the way: lookout points, kiosks, something. 

^So I'm guessing the transportation center idea isn't being looked at as long as they are only looking for funds just a pedestrian bridge?

 

Yep, this appears to be the case.  Officials would rather wing it, ignore the trains and look to fill the $17.5M gap elsewhere rather than more logically tying in the bridge to the RTA Waterfront Line and the Amtrak terminal (potential regional rail hub) that fall just below it which would make the project eligible for a TIGER grant to subsidize this amount -- it was noted earlier that the Feds turned down the City's TIGER application because the bridge merely connects to a parking garage.  It's unfortunate and myopic and once again reinforces the cars-first/anti-transit mentality of our public officials.  This approach completely ignores the inter-mobile access/increased walk-a-bility possibilities for this area where officials clearly want to increase density and foot traffic.