Could West Prospect be used more? I know they already have several bus stops there and that area does provide slightly better rail connections.

 

they tried that in the 1990s, the issue is West prospect is a bridge and buses did alot of damage to those bridges resulting in leaks into Tower city. and even onto the rail platforms below.

 

 

 

group plan commission hires director, set to break ground this year on public square revitalization

 

 

Was there ever an announcement, etc as far as what this "public square revitalization" will involve??

 

There is a public meeting coming up in the next couple months where more finalized plans will be released by the designer. That's what I understood

 

The plans have been out there for a couple of years now and it is no secret what will happen.  http://www.land-studio.org/our-work/public-square-redesign

 

 

^ I am not convinced that this plan provides enough retail amenities to draw more life to the square.

 

group plan commission hires director, set to break ground this year on public square revitalization

 

 

Was there ever an announcement, etc as far as what this "public square revitalization" will involve??

 

There is a public meeting coming up in the next couple months where more finalized plans will be released by the designer. That's what I understood

 

The plans have been out there for a couple of years now and it is no secret what will happen.  http://www.land-studio.org/our-work/public-square-redesign

 

 

Yep, I've seen this site before, but it was from 4 years ago.  And even it has 3 options for possible changes to PS.  I was just wondering if there was an "official" decision on what changes would be made to PS.

 

I guess we'll find out more in a couple of months after the public meeting.

 

I really like the plan, and think it will definitely spur development on the parking lots.  Dare I say however, between this, and the malls, are we crossing the lines into having too much green space in close proximity?  Just a though and concern.

The three options are older. The more recent design is this one:

http://www.land-studio.org/files/projects/viewer/jcfopublicsqaerial.jpg

 

@gotribe...we already have the green space, though. It's not like we can tear up the mall and develop it.

 

I personally love this plan. I wish Superior would shut down too, but closing it to vehicles and just making it for buses is a good incremental step. I can't wait!

^^^I thought we'd moved beyond those 3 plans from a few years ago and onto the plans listed at the top of this page that DM4 posted.

 

Edit: What ^ said.

The three options are older. The more recent design is this one:

http://www.land-studio.org/files/projects/viewer/jcfopublicsqaerial.jpg

 

@gotribe...we already have the green space, though. It's not like we can tear up the mall and develop it.

 

I personally love this plan. I wish Superior would shut down too, but closing it to vehicles and just making it for buses is a good incremental step. I can't wait!

You're correct, it's already there.  However, would it have been advantageous to redevelop half of PS, and leave the other half in front of Key available for future development.  Obviously keep it green (don't need any more asphalt around here), but keep it reserved for structures.

IMHO, I think the mall has more grounds to be developed in some way than public square. That said, I don't think either should be developed. There is a market for great public spaces...we just don't really have them in Cleveland.

 

As an example, I would point to Bicentennial Park in Cbus. Before its redesign, I went there once and was not impressed. After its redesign, I (and THOUSANDS of others) have gone there all the time. There is just one restaurant, but the fountain, connecting bike trails, and beautiful views make it amazing. I think the redesign of Public Square could do the same. (though I am hesitant that it will be as great with buses literally rumbling through the middle of it)

 

http://www.sciotomile.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/bicentennial-park.jpg

Kind of looks like a butterfly.  I love the use of pavers and the idea of making half the square mostly greenspace and the other half mostly hardscape.  It probably wouldn't hurt to cut a few pathways through the greenspace half.... otherwise it will be mostly unusable in the wintertime.

I wish Superior would shut down too, but closing it to vehicles and just making it for buses is a good incremental step. I can't wait!

 

Agreed.  I want Ontario and Superior to BOTH be shut down to traffic

The three options are older. The more recent design is this one:

http://www.land-studio.org/files/projects/viewer/jcfopublicsqaerial.jpg

 

@gotribe...we already have the green space, though. It's not like we can tear up the mall and develop it.

 

I personally love this plan. I wish Superior would shut down too, but closing it to vehicles and just making it for buses is a good incremental step. I can't wait!

 

I could be wrong, but I think that on the weekends Superior would be closed completed to cars and buses. Then it'd be buses only during the week. Lots of serious cash put into traffic studies for traffic engineering firms that understand the importance of bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

It's ok to post the graphic so we can see it without clicking on it. I almost didn't see the link on the previous page. So here's the favored plan.....

 

I'm not a fan at all.  I don't mind some green, but would prefer this setting remain truly urban.  Like a European city centre, with lots of paving bricks. 

 

These look like a Disney entrance.

Looks good to me, lots of trees and greenery but we are the "Forest City" after all.

I think any re-design will be an improvement, but the real area of concern is in the background of the conceptual rendering... all the surface lots! 

Functionality and design really need to take winter into account.  I know that's beating a dead horse, but it does.  Might Greenery only lasts 5 months here, so we need to look at that rendering without leaves and dormant grass.  They should create and post that.  Redesign is necessary, but we can't go wrong here.  This is going to be here for many years to come.

Wasn't the big complaint about Downtown was that it lacks green space? Well I feel as if this is something that fights that. Also if you take away the green space then your basically created a connected version of what's there now amd that's ugly. So I believe that the grass has to be there to create another gathering space and not have the whole thing look monochromatic and dull.

Wasn't the big complaint about Downtown was that it lacks green space?

 

It doesn't lack green space/plazas, it lacks GOOD spaces and well located spaces.

I like the idea of an urban forest

This is the hub of our city.  Where transport, entertainment and employment meet.  It should be very urban, yet comfortable to hang out in.  And most importantly, in Cleveland, is it has to be functional in 4 seasons, and easy to keep clean and tidy. 

 

I'm thinking something more along the lines of Trafalgar Square in London.  Some fountains, a little greenery, and traffic somehow restricted to the outside (perhaps buses exempted).  Plenty of space for lunchtime, transit waiters, and maybe a concert or two.

 

 

Have a look:

 

http://architecture.org.nz/2011/06/15/trafalgar-square/

This is the hub of our city.  Where transport, entertainment and employment meet.  It should be very urban, yet comfortable to hang out in.  And most importantly, in Cleveland, is it has to be functional in 4 seasons, and easy to keep clean and tidy. 

 

I'm thinking something more along the lines of Trafalgar Square in London.  Some fountains, a little greenery, and traffic somehow restricted to the outside (perhaps buses exempted).  Plenty of space for lunchtime, transit waiters, and maybe a concert or two.

 

 

Have a look:

 

http://architecture.org.nz/2011/06/15/trafalgar-square/

 

There is a huge size difference between the two spaces.

 

Trafalgar Square is about 2 acres.

 

Public Square is about 6 acres (almost 10 if you include the surrounding streets)

 

Trafalgar Square is also home to a major museum which is a huge traffic generator. Add in the fact it has several historic monuments, completely surrounded by historic architecture, and is a tourist destination in a global city, the two spaces just don't compare.

 

 

Public Square needs a massive, monumental fountain at the center of the square. This requires closing Superior but is well worth it. People are drawn to fountains. A massive one right in the middle could be seen from far away and would provide interesting views from Superior further East and West, Ontario, and other parts of downtown. Offices do very little for public space. Especially in a city where every building has an attached garage.

 

Although that would be a little draw, the space itself doesnt really matter as much as the surroundings. You can build an amazing space but if the surrounding uses remain the same, the square will never be successful. You would probably get more people than there is now, but it would be far from being a great space as a whole.

Functionality and design really need to take winter into account.  I know that's beating a dead horse, but it does.  Might Greenery only lasts 5 months here, so we need to look at that rendering without leaves and dormant grass.  They should create and post that.  Redesign is necessary, but we can't go wrong here.  This is going to be here for many years to come.

 

Some evergreens would help. They smell great, look great (especially during the holidays) and add some green in late-winter when some is desperately needed. People will want to be there just because the setting will lift people's spirits.

3+ acres of pavers seems to be plenty to cover any traffic PS generates in the winter. 

 

I wouldn't mind a few strategically placed conifers.  Deciduous trees with high canopies, with a few ornamental trees here and there, seems to be what they are planning.  But that doesn't mean that the square will look 'dead' in the winter.  With tasteful decorations, the square will sparkle quite nicely in the winter.  Let's see that rendering! 

For me, the park is way to open. There seems to be a lack of a pathway system, places to escape the sun, smaller lawns, flowers, etc.

 

All examples have several things in common. A central focal point, often surrounded by a large area (circle) or pavers. Outside of the center, there are pathways lined with trees, benches, landscaping and flowers, iron fencing, smaller pocket lawns, and lots of trees.

 

Our center of our design is still a street. Superior needs to close in order to design a great space.

 

Examples from successful parks

 

 

 

 

 

 

^Those are good examples for PS... They look to be mostly the great urban square/parks of the old eastern cities, including Rittenhouse Square, in Philly, and the Common/Public Gardens in Baastin.

I'm pretty sure that paths and small hidden spaces are not a good idea on a square that has had significant safety issues.  Look at the recent renovations to Perk Park, they were intended primarily to eliminate those sorts of spaces, and make it more open and easily surveiled.

As far as the PS redesign proposal, ... I'm 50:50 on it.  We absolutely must radically change what's there currently, and the proposal improves many of PS's current failings.  My biggest criticism is Superior's still cutting through.  As is too often the case in Cleveland's big urban projects, we go far but not far enough; were never all in and, in this case, we just can't let go of the past esp. with regard to our roadway/driving habits... It reminds me of the difficulty we're having with converting the West Shoreway into a boulevard...  Yes, closing Superior will cause a massive reconfiguration of our transportation system, but creating a first class, front-door urban living room at Public Square is worth it.  Make that thing into a large, Euro-type round-about.  Philadelphia did it with William Penn's 1600’s design for central Phily – the whole city at the time -- which includes Center Square onto which the City, in 1890, plunked its gigantic Second Empire-style City Hall... No, obviously, Cleveland's Public Sq. is considerably different than Center Sq, esp since our City Hall is located elsewhere downtown, but I raise Philly only for the idea that it shows that massive amounts of street traffic (and in a city/metro area much larger than Cleveland) can be routed around a center square of a major city.  Last I looked, Center City Philly is still functioning traffic-wise….

 

My other criticism of the design is there's too much plaza area, and not enough green (grass & trees) on the southern half.  In the perfect world, the massive S&S Monument (which is an urban treasure) would not/should not be at the corner of a major square like PS, but that's how things developed over time, so we've got to figure a way best to integrate it into the plan... and I'm not sure this proposal does that.

 

I wish Superior would shut down too, but closing it to vehicles and just making it for buses is a good incremental step. I can't wait!

 

Agreed.  I want Ontario and Superior to BOTH be shut down to traffic

 

They are - I'm just looking for more in this plan to assure us that wayward motorists (ie from out of state, or Medina) can't get through. Beyond a hoard of RTA riders with pitchforks.

Functionality and design really need to take winter into account.  I know that's beating a dead horse, but it does.  Might Greenery only lasts 5 months here, so we need to look at that rendering without leaves and dormant grass.  They should create and post that.  Redesign is necessary, but we can't go wrong here.  This is going to be here for many years to come.

 

Some evergreens would help. They smell great, look great (especially during the holidays) and add some green in late-winter when some is desperately needed. People will want to be there just because the setting will lift people's spirits.

 

problem with evergreens is that most of them kill grass, by acidifying the soil, which is whay you usually don't see them in parks with alot of grass.

 

Yes. Do these renderings ever show winter and the after-effects of it?

As evidenced by these pics from this wkd at Village square in Woodmere, OK prime snowbelt

(downtown, the mountains of snow were enormous this year, and the grime -- to be expected, i know -- is one for the books)

 

 

I think the weird blue area in the middle of the south section should be a fountain surrounded by benches and gardens. Otherwise, I'm okay with the design. But if we want Public Square to be successful, then we need more people living near it. Office buildings don't produce enough foot traffic. The May Co. Building conversion will help some, but we need more than that. We need an apartment/condo tower built on the Public Square parking lot, and maybe even a residential component to Tower City (at the intersection of W. Prospect and Superior).

Isn't one of the major concerns with closing Superior completely that it is a Federal Highway.

Another problem with closing Superior (and maybe even with just closing Ontario) is that the buses aren't going anywhere.  The relocated bus stops would form a wall of people and the bus stops themselves around the square.  Plus, in this square roundabout, you'd have all the buses stopping and idling around the perimeter.  I don't think crossing into or out of the square would be a very welcoming situation.

 

I think this still may happen with the current design: you're eliminating the bus stops on Ontario and forcing them to move to other spots along the perimeter.  The density of buses around the edges is going to increase and I don't think that's a good thing.

 

The solution would be to make Public Square less of an RTA hub, but it doesn't sound like that's going to happen either.

What if---and I understand this would be tremendously expensive, yada yada---but what if buses dropped below public square, we built a tunnel up to the Detroit-Superior bridge, made the underside of that bridge a bus way, and the buses came back up on the other side. It would be rapid transit, we could have a temperature-controlled bus hub in the center of the city, and public square could be made whole again.

 

Seattle did a bus tunnel:

http://ktransit.com/transit/NAmerica/uspnw/seattle/bustunnel/Photos/sea-bustun-pioneer-112202-05.jpg

 

As did Boston:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Silver_Line_%28MBTA%29_1297.jpg

 

And of course Cincinnati has the tunnel underneath the Banks. (for the record, I don't know how to post a whole picture in a post, ergo the links---help anybody?)

RTA buses are diesel.  A bus tunnel requires electric, or dual powered buses.

Even Cincy's?

 

Edit: Yea, you're right. Well. It was a thought.

Isn't one of the major concerns with closing Superior completely that it is a Federal Highway.

 

Yes. Trying to permanently close a section of a federally designated road is damn near impossible.

^But the presumed favored proposal is closing Superior to public traffic, no?  Assuming that can be done, I suspect that the feds would also allow a full closure of that segment as long as the Public Square roadways met all the federal design requirements and NOACA was on board. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there's a fairly routine process for minor route alterations.

It always seems to come down to the idea that certain quality urban projects in this town are "impossible" because of all the federal red tape (see: "because it's hard").  It's the reason why Burke remains open despite the choice high-rise residential and retail lakefront land it sits on.  It's also why a stupid giant surface parking lot has sat adjacent to the same Public Square for going on 30 years... But some things are worth fighting for: in this case, a quality Public Square.  If a federal process is required for rerouting the federal routes carried on Superior because of closing this main avenue, then why not engage the process?  And if it's a roadblock (no pun intended), let's call our congress people, notably Marcia Fudge and Marcy Kaptur, if necessary -- I'm in.  If we're talking about creating an enclosed, enjoyable walkable public park in the City's heart, what sense does it make to allow for it to be split in half by street traffic with tons of cars and noisy trucks rumbling through?  Doesn't that kinda defeat the purpose all this extreme time and money is being expended for? ... For once in this town with such a large-scale civic project we need to do it right, and not half do it (or if that's the case as I say, don't do it at all)... The Cleveland landscape is littered with half-done and scaled-down less effective/ineffective projects built either for political and/or economic expediency. 

 

... rant completed.

^But the presumed favored proposal is closing Superior to public traffic, no?  Assuming that can be done, I suspect that the feds would also allow a full closure of that segment as long as the Public Square roadways met all the federal design requirements and NOACA was on board. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there's a fairly routine process for minor route alterations.

 

I think the proposal is only to close Superior on weekends or special events.

This is what I understood to be the favored plan, but I don't have any inside info:

 

Ontario would get closed. Superior would be open only to bus traffic during the weekdays. And I'm pretty sure it would be closed completely on weekends. Lots and lots of work going on behind the scenes to get this done asap.

Isn't one of the major concerns with closing Superior completely that it is a Federal Highway.

 

Yes. Trying to permanently close a section of a federally designated road is damn near impossible.

 

Who's proposing to "close" anything? The road would be re-routed 400 ft around the outside of the square. No closing. As StrapHanger mentions, minor changes to federal highways are a common occurrence.

 

 

Isn't one of the major concerns with closing Superior completely that it is a Federal Highway.

 

Yes. Trying to permanently close a section of a federally designated road is damn near impossible.

Its really not that hard.  It will just have to co-join Euclid and be rt 20/6 for about 500 feet, then pick back up on the other side of the square.  Really, this isn't hard at a all.  This is not the issue.  I'd have to say RTA is a bigger roadblock in this matter then the dept. Of transportation.

^The RTA situation may not be as bad as you think.  A number of East Side and SE side buses have already been routed off the Square through/straight along Prospect to Superior-W. 6th.  Forcing these buses to loop around downtown, to some degree and serve such areas as the Warehouse Dist can only aid rider distribution anyway... The Prospect connection to the Rapids is actually better for bus riders than hoping off along Ontario (once buses turn off Prospect heading north) through Public Square.  It would appear that inbound West Side buses could similarly make the dogleg off Superior and onto either Prospect or Huron, where there's also an entrance to Tower City -- the problem with the latter is, as of now, I think the entrance closes once TC does at night.  I believe only the Public Square and Prospect entrances remain open...

 

... As for buses coming from the N.E., planners will have to be more creative, but there are less of these than buses coming from the other areas of the County. Right now, PS's perimeter is mostly reserved for the HL and the trolleys.  If the other regular routes are eliminated from the perimeter, I don't see the resulting totally (perimeter) roundabout PS traffic being impossible by any stretch... Hell, I actually think we've build downtown to be too driver friendly, and that's largely been why the Square remains as it does.  Make drivers sweat a bit and get stuck in traffic down there.  It can only serve to put more butts onto RTA, esp the Rapid in the long run, which is a good thing. (sorry E.Rocc) 

 

Who's proposing to "close" anything? The road would be re-routed 400 ft around the outside of the square. No closing. As StrapHanger mentions, minor changes to federal highways are a common occurrence.

 

No one is proposing it because the FHWA will not allow it unless there is another alternative that doesn't negatively impact truck access for the largest allowable trucks, and even those permitted under waiver. Can you imagine 80,000-pound trucks negotiating the tight corners of the perimeter of Public Square on a regular basis? Anything is possible, but I just don't see it in this instance.

I saw on the news that Superior would only be left open for bus traffic. RTA needs to just reroute. Keeping superior open, even if just for bus traffic, is a HUGE mistake. It will make it nearly impossible to design a good space when the center is a bus lane.

Isn't one of the major concerns with closing Superior completely that it is a Federal Highway.

 

Yes. Trying to permanently close a section of a federally designated road is damn near impossible.

 

Ontario is a federally designated road (US 422) through the southern half of the square and it is being closed permanently, though.

^True.  But Superior through PS is part of The Grand Army of the Republic Highway (US 6) covering several thousand miles, right?  And 422 is a few hundred mile spur of US 22 which ends at Ontario/Lakeside.  US 6 would have to be rerouted, whereas US 422's western edge can simply be adjusted a few hundred yards with this planned closure.  I'd guess that the former involves a lot more red tape.

Keeping superior open, even if just for bus traffic, is a HUGE mistake. It will make it nearly impossible to design a good space when the center is a bus lane.

 

Yes, I completely agree!!