PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. Also, check your spam folder. *****

We are still having a lot of users try to log on before resetting your password. You will continue to get an error until you reset your password!!

Author Topic: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)  (Read 2113 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online freethink

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2032
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #750 on: January 09, 2017, 10:18:54 AM »
FYI  The name of this trail is the Lake Link Trail (aka Cleveland Foundation Centennial Trail-Lake Link). Lakefront Bikeway Connector

I believe the CLB is part of the CFCT. Is it not?

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2999060-NARRATIVE.html#pages/p12

Online simplythis

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 546

Offline PoshSteve

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #752 on: February 19, 2017, 04:24:34 PM »
Lots of work going on yesterday in the future Canal Basin Park. The area was full of construction workers and cement trucks. Looks like they're working on the replacement of the NEORSD pump station right now.



From Superior Viaduct:


Offline gotribe

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2592
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #753 on: February 19, 2017, 05:09:56 PM »
I'm going to pretend that last pic is a progress shot for a new 30 story apartment tower on the river!

Offline surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6682
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #754 on: February 19, 2017, 06:00:02 PM »
I'm going to pretend that last pic is a progress shot for a new 30 story apartment tower on the river!

Yes...Toby Keith Tower!

Offline NorthShore647

  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #755 on: February 21, 2017, 11:05:38 PM »
Last Saturday (Feb. 18) was the Brite Winter 2017 music festival around the West Bank. I have never seen this neighborhood so active and filled with people. Granted a festival isn't a weekly occurrence, especially with this good of weather in February, but you could really see the potential of the entire area. People were walking to FEB, West 25th, and the Warehouse District from the festival, showing that further development here could really help the entire area.

This video has some cool shots of the festival. 





Offline ragarcia

  • Huntington Tower 330'
  • **
  • Posts: 186
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #756 on: February 24, 2017, 10:17:57 AM »
That looks like it was a great time.

Offline UrbinLegend

  • Excavation Site
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #757 on: March 02, 2017, 04:54:52 PM »
I cant find it in here, but what is the construction going on down on the Cuyahoga river by Settlers landing?   It has been blocked off for sometime now. Can anyone let me know?

Offline dave68

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #758 on: March 02, 2017, 06:18:09 PM »
I cant find it in here, but what is the construction going on down on the Cuyahoga river by Settlers landing?   It has been blocked off for sometime now. Can anyone let me know?

Construction of the new NEORSD pump station

Offline dave68

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #759 on: March 02, 2017, 06:21:05 PM »
According to these, Van Duser will be demolished....

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/11062015/index.php

City Planning Commission
Agenda for November 6, 2015

DOWNTOWN/FLATS DESIGN REVIEW

DF2015-098 – Proposed Demolition of (1) One-Story and (1) Two-Story Industrial Building for the Superior Avenue Pump Station New Construction: Seeking Schematic Design Approval
Project Address: 1516 Merwin Avenue
Project Representatives: Steve Janosko, NEORSD
Vito Cimino, MWH Americas















DF2015-101 –Initial Greening Plan for a portion of future Canal Basin Park: Seeking Schematic Design Approval
Project Location: Merwin Avenue and West Avenue
Project Representative: Sean McDermott, Cleveland Metroparks







Offline Pugu

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1534
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #760 on: March 02, 2017, 09:02:46 PM »
Why are they talking all the space for the little building? that's prime riverfront property on the downtown side of the river. Would make for a wonderful cafe or something like that........so typical of this city...no vision.

Offline YABO713

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1051
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #761 on: March 02, 2017, 10:00:07 PM »
Why are they talking all the space for the little building? that's prime riverfront property on the downtown side of the river. Would make for a wonderful cafe or something like that........so typical of this city...no vision.

Uhhhh? Are you aware of the function of a pump station or just a pessimist?

Offline w28th

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #762 on: March 02, 2017, 10:01:39 PM »
Denmark makes power stations into ski hills, we turn pump stations into fortresses. Thanks NEORSD

Offline sizzlinbeef

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 232
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #763 on: March 03, 2017, 09:37:19 AM »
because terrorism and think of the children

Offline jws

  • Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • *
  • Posts: 98
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #764 on: March 03, 2017, 11:34:23 AM »
Just to defend NEORSD a bit:

- There could be some pretty specific regulations regarding minimum clearances between various site components to which the design had to adhere. Not actually sure of that, but it's plausible.
- They probably need some space for vehicle access that is still protected from public access which likely accounts for most of the site's footprint. It looks like you can drive in through one gate and continue around the back perimeter of the site to exit through the other. Most of the space that isn't dedicated to this pass-through looks to be utilized.
- Let's at least give them credit for building an architecturally accurate building.
- They did at least create a setback from the bulkhead so that the public can still walk along the riverside. They could have just extended the fences up to the bulkhead and cut off all access.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 11:35:10 AM by jws »

Offline w28th

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2210
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #765 on: March 03, 2017, 03:23:37 PM »
The problem with this is architectural, not engineering. I understand the building needs to function in a specific manner, but those constraints could be taken by a design professional and create something that performs for all stakeholders. Lack of creativity is the crime here.

Offline yanni_gogolak

  • Global Moderator
  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #766 on: March 04, 2017, 03:01:10 PM »
Denmark makes power stations into ski hills, we turn pump stations into fortresses. Thanks NEORSD




Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 12870
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #767 on: March 05, 2017, 11:26:40 AM »
Denmark makes power stations into ski hills, we turn pump stations into fortresses. Thanks NEORSD






i know, but denmark also does a lot of other more traditional, nifty, inspirational stuff around their waterfronts:


Offline yanni_gogolak

  • Global Moderator
  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #768 on: March 06, 2017, 03:42:08 PM »
Copenhagen is one of the richest cities and highest cost of living cities in the world (ahead of NYC). It's not really a fair comparison to the photo.
As w28th pointed out however, they also take more pride in their built environment. The trash burning plant which fuels the city's steam heat also has a pretty cool steam chimney that will blow a steam ring out. The city did not want to pay for this so it was successfully crowd funded by the architect.

Offline PoshSteve

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #769 on: April 18, 2017, 08:28:01 PM »
More progress on the Lake Link Trail. They tore up the little parking lot next to my building where the trail is going to push under the viaduct. The rest of the parking lot will remain.


Online simplythis

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 546
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #770 on: April 22, 2017, 01:45:16 PM »

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #771 on: May 19, 2017, 06:40:04 PM »
What's going on with the Metroparks Water Taxi?  According to their website, they're still just doing that single-boat, over-and-back FEB-FWB shuttle.  Seems a waste.  I would have thought, by now, they would have multiple boats and have routes covering places Merwin's, Settlers Landing, Wendy Island and, maybe even, North Coast Harbor.  What's the holdup, lack of corporate sponsors?  This is the summer I thought Water Taxi would really be expanding, especially with expanded activities and restaurants on and coming online like Collision Bend and Margaritaville.

Offline PoshSteve

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #772 on: May 19, 2017, 07:32:10 PM »
It's only been there for one season. I'm sure they don't want to over expand before this one is fully mature. Talking with the captains last year, even at the end of the season they were still working out the kinks.

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #773 on: May 19, 2017, 07:47:24 PM »
It's only been there for one season. I'm sure they don't want to over expand before this one is fully mature. Talking with the captains last year, even at the end of the season they were still working out the kinks.
Sounds pretty conservative to me.  I mean the FEB has been open  2 years and we've had a full summer with the FEB boardwalk open. .Same with Merwins. Shooters has been open since forever as has been the Powerhouse which has had the Aquarium for, what, 4 or 5 years now? What are they waiting for?

I'll give Metroparks last year to get their legs under them. But now it's over a year and clearly the Flats, esp FEB, has established itself as a bonafide hit, esp on weekend nights (and not even warm ones at that).  Now with many designated cultural events down there along with Flat Out Friday's which was a hit... Again, what is Metroparks waiting for?

Offline X

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 9568
    • Western Reserve Meadery
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #774 on: May 20, 2017, 01:28:58 AM »
You can always buy some boats and do it yourself.  Better than complaining on here about it.

Offline Cleburger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #775 on: May 20, 2017, 09:27:38 AM »
I'm sure it's not as easy as it sounds.  If it were, the Metroparks would do it.  There has to be demand for the service.  Then of course operating a commercial service to multiple destinations with boatloads of people on a shipping lane with 600' lake freighters is not without regulatory hurdles.

Offline Baskervilles

  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #776 on: May 20, 2017, 10:29:42 AM »
You can always buy some boats and do it yourself.  Better than complaining on here about it.

Not trying to use my 9th post to pick a fight with a global moderator. But change the word "boats" to "land" and this could be the response to every complaint about a poorly designed non-urban development on this forum.

Hopefully activity down there this season is high enough to convince them to support an extended line next year.

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #777 on: May 20, 2017, 10:38:11 AM »
You can always buy some boats and do it yourself.  Better than complaining on here about it.

Great attitude X.  So glad you're not running things in this town.

Online MayDay

  • Administrator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 10307
    • Cleveland Skyscrapers
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #778 on: May 20, 2017, 10:52:10 AM »
Not claiming to have much knowledge about the maritime trade but one issue with expanding the water taxi - if you've ever taken it, it's not exactly breaking any speed records. To cover additional areas like Wendy Park, North Coast Harbor, etc. while maintaining a reasonable wait/trip time ... I'm guessing they'd need a significant amount more boats *or* bigger/faster which is probably cost prohibitive. As Cleburger said, if there's one group I'd put a little faith in getting something right, it's the Metroparks. With that, let's get back on topic.

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland: Flats Developments (Non-Stonebridge or FEB)
« Reply #779 on: May 20, 2017, 10:55:34 AM »
I'm sure it's not as easy as it sounds.  If it were, the Metroparks would do it.  There has to be demand for the service.  Then of course operating a commercial service to multiple destinations with boatloads of people on a shipping lane with 600' lake freighters is not without regulatory hurdles.

Obviously, I like most people, absolutely love the awesome, long-standing service of Cleveland Metroparks: their tremendous upkeep of our amazing Emerald Necklace park system; the Zoo; Merwin's Warf and the major improvements/upgrades of Edgewater Park since they've come in a few years ago... They're obviously good people.  I'm just not sure they are the best group to be running the Water Taxi... I'm not saying they aren't, I just feel the jury is still out... The boat and crew of the single run they now have is top quality, as expected.  No denying that.

But even before they started, I was a little put off by their decision to cut off service after 9p because, in their words, they weren't designed to 'ferry around drunks' in the Flats... That attitude was troubling if, for anything, how could they project the Flats would revert to being, once again as in the old torn-down Flats, a crowd largely of drunks?  I haven't seen that so far I the happy resurgence of FEB and even quality-looking Collision Bend restaurant/brewpub.  I don't know if a better regulated (than the old Holy Moses folks) private water taxi operator wouldn't be preferable for the Flats... I'm not saying they would; I'm just not sure they wouldn't be...

With all the casual boaters, including college crew, jet skis, paddle boats and small pleasure craft along the Cuyahoga in the Flats these days, it's obvious that a whole lot of people want to be out on the water.  From the long Water Taxi lines we endured last summer just to ride across the river and back, it was obvious back then... and now, this summer, with FEB even more established -- and East Bank establishments expanding, it's even more so.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2017, 10:58:12 AM by clvlndr »