Author Topic: Cleveland: Lakefront Development and News  (Read 498345 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline MyTwoSense

  • 40+ and Fly
  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 21067
  • back with a vengeance!
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #175 on: May 29, 2008, 12:07:39 PM »
Now youíre an expert on our lakefront?

but we also have to remember, our lakefront, unlike many others has always been a working lakefront.

Unlike many others? Are you kidding? It's the same thing for Chicago, Buffalo, Toledo, Duluth, Sandusky, Erie, etc., etc. All the major Great Lakes ports (and ocean ports) have working waterfronts (meaning a large shipping component). Still, many have managed to increase public access to the water and are undergoing large redevelopments. Cleveland does lag behind in lakefront development. For some reason, Cleveland focused more on Cuyahoga Creek. There IS however one big difference between Cleveland and the other Great Lakes cities. Cleveland's port is right smack in downtown. Most the Great Lakes cities have their port in another area (or in Toledo's case, two other areas).

Clevelandís downtown lakefront has always been working, unlike others who have increased it and by the way the river and lake are naturally arrange, itís never been a thought to live downtown until the 80ís.

As you state, other cities ports were not in the heart of the CBD.



In addition the soil and how the natural shoreline was created is some sort of issue, if my memory serves me correctly.

It is a completely man-made harbor (and the breakwater stretches for five miles). It doesn't have a natural harbor like you find in most other major shipping ports. Still, there's a hell of a lot more that can be done with the harbor area to increase its appeal.
Iím speaking about the actual natural shoreline and our bedrock, which is different than other cities.  I cannot find the information as to why ours is different, but maybe KJP knows.

Not until the 80's did people look at it from a recreational or housing perspective.

Not true. There used to be way more public beaches/resorts in Cleveland than there are today. It's the same story all over Ohio. Ohio has done little to help Lake Erie. We've decreased public access, destroyed beaches, destroyed over 80% of the marshland (which cleaned the water and increase wildlife), polluted the sh!t out of the water (the Cleveland dead zone) and torn down most of the summer resorts (save for Ottawa County and Cedar Point).

Your post doesn't surprise me one bit MTS. You, like most Ohioans, are not aware of what we once had in this state and chose to destroy. There is not single state in this country with worse track record of water pollution than Ohio. There also are very few states that have destroyed as much marshland and natural beaches. When the original settlers came to Ohio, Lake Erie was sprakling clear. The massive complex complex of marshes kept out silt, runoff, and pollution.

Again, Iím talking about DOWNTOWN where the port is relocated.  What part of this  donít you understand??

There have never been beaches in DOWNTOWN CLEVELAND or RESIDENTIAL LIVING until the 80s.
my 2 Ę     Please Sell Crazy Someplace Else....We Have Excess Inventory Here!!

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #176 on: May 29, 2008, 12:08:27 PM »
Now youíre an expert on our lakefront?

You're damn right I am. My family has been on the port authority of Ohio cities, and I study this extensively.

Again, Iím talking about DOWNTOWN where the port is relocated.  What part of this  donít you understand??

Then SAY THAT. You're original post completely forgot to bring that up (though I did).
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:18:44 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline MyTwoSense

  • 40+ and Fly
  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 21067
  • back with a vengeance!
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #177 on: May 29, 2008, 12:09:20 PM »
 :roll:
my 2 Ę     Please Sell Crazy Someplace Else....We Have Excess Inventory Here!!

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #178 on: May 29, 2008, 12:09:26 PM »
Being that the state government functions 130 miles away from Lake Erie, don't expect coastal issues to be addressed with the kind of urgency that they require.

I buckled and reluctantly headed over the the Rib Fest at Tower City Amp on Saturday, and I'm actually glad I went. The place was just packed with all kinds of people. The best thing was the waterfront ambience, the festival atmostphere, you could feel it. It is just something you can't ever get in Solon, Strongsville or Medina.

Now this is what kills me. The rib fest is a stupid ripoff but it is a good draw nonetheless because of the atmosphere. Imagine what kind of regional magnet an established boardwalk area in this town could be, a place with arcades, shopping, and waterfront views.  It's such a simple concept really. 
\
A place like a renewed Euclid Beach Park could practically materialize overnight at Scranton Peninsula or elsewhere, becoming the kind of draw that brings people back to the water. 

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #179 on: May 29, 2008, 12:10:20 PM »
Iím speaking about the actual natural shoreline and our bedrock, which is different than other cities.  I cannot find the information as to why ours is different, but maybe KJP knows.

There isn't much natural shoreline left in the first place. It's mostly gone today. Bedrock is different from the Western Basin, but not that uncommon. Cleveland does have much deeper bedrock though. It's softer bedrock, unlike the limestone bedrock of Toledo and Detroit, which sometimes is only a few feet from the surface (see the Islands area). Basically, the glaciers were able to carve deeper in the Cleveland area than they could in Toledo, Detroit, and Sandusky.

A place like a renewed Euclid Beach Park could practically materialize overnight at Scranton Peninsula or elsewhere, becoming the kind of draw that brings people back to the water.

It would be incredible, and I've pushed for that for a long time.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:13:01 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #180 on: May 29, 2008, 12:16:23 PM »
Being that the state government functions 130 miles away from Lake Erie, don't expect coastal issues to be addressed with the kind of urgency that they require.

And our state government doesn't give a damn about water (Columbus has no real water, and its creeks are mud). It's the work of Marcy Kaptur that has brought much-needed attention to Lake Erie and the watershed. Still, 130 miles is not far. Lansing is far from the water in Michigan, but you don't see Michigan ignoring their coasts. I realize Michigan is an extreme example since it has one of the largest coastlines of any state in the union, but still...
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:16:43 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #181 on: May 29, 2008, 12:23:03 PM »
Hey C-Dawg are the jetty's parallel to the beach in Presqu Isle considered tombolos?

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36675
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #182 on: May 29, 2008, 12:25:41 PM »
Two threads were combined and based here in the city discussion section, since the older thread dealt mainly with the lakefront plan. Individual projects such as the port relocation, Pesht, etc. should continue to be discussed at the Cleveland development projects section.
"George Washington could never tell a lie.
Richard Nixon could never tell the truth.
Donald Trump cannot tell the difference."

 -- Mark Shields,  News Hour

Offline Punch

  • UO Supporting Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3900
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #183 on: May 29, 2008, 12:27:07 PM »
So cue the Pollyanna picture

What strategies can I, or we, persue to put lakefront development higher on the regional adgenda?  Do we go to elected officials, or lobby groups such as the Cleveland Foundation or even Cleveland Public Art?
Originally Punch, then CleveChiNola, now back to Punch.

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #184 on: May 29, 2008, 12:36:00 PM »
Unless your a big developer, I don't think there's a silver bullet solution....just try and get more people involved with realizing this great resource we have.

ps.

Here's some info on the Ohio Coastal Managment Program that nobody knows about:

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Default.aspx?alias=www.dnr.state.oh.us/coastal

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #185 on: May 29, 2008, 12:38:06 PM »
Hey C-Dawg are the jetty's parallel to the beach in Presqu Isle considered tombolos?

yes. The tombolos/segmented offshore breakwaters work to trap sand particles and are the most effective and best-looking way to restore beaches. The steel groins at Crane Creek were the worst and resulted in a very irregular beach with lots of sand on one side but not the other. Segmented offshore breakwaters maintain a smoother, more natural beach. The biggest problem with Maumee Bay (and a few other beaches) is that they didn't put them offshore. They must be offshore to have any effect.

They could be used anywhere outside of the Cleveland breakwater. There isn't enough sand to build a natural beach within the breakwater since it basically blocks all littoral transport.

Maumee Bay, don't do this. Put them offshore. You can see how quickly the sand stops in the Lake Erie:


The following is an example of the segmented breakwaters at East Harbor (metro Toledo, but relevant to this discussion). East Harbor used to be by far Ohio's largest beach, with over 2.5 miles of uninterrupted sand. It was wide as hell too. What's left of the beach is the northern part where some limited restoration has begun. The southern part was wiped out by a nightmare storm in 1972. The majority of the beach has not been restored due to lack of state funding:

« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:56:33 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #186 on: May 29, 2008, 12:39:40 PM »
What strategies can I, or we, persue to put lakefront development higher on the regional adgenda?  Do we go to elected officials, or lobby groups such as the Cleveland Foundation or even Cleveland Public Art?

National government can help a lot. I'm not sure who all the representatives are in Cleveland, but I know Toledo and Sandusky use their Great Lakes queen Marcy Kaptur to great lengths in securing national funding for the lake and marshes.

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #187 on: May 29, 2008, 12:46:00 PM »
Oh man, I hate those things!!!  Very dangerous for surfing and swimming, not to mention they look very unnatural. 

I am not against the tombolos I've seen on wiki/google on a larger scale, but those Presque Isle formations are not good.

In fact, I worked to convince Chris Ronayne to remove a similar proposal at Edgewater Park under the Lakefront Plan.

But I definitely agree with your Wetlands/marsh restoration. Sign me up.

Hey C-Dawg are the jetty's parallel to the beach in Presqu Isle considered tombolos?

yes. The tombolos/segmented offshore breakwaters work to trap sand particles and are the most effective and best-looking way to restore beaches. The steel groins at Crane Creek were the worst and resulted in a very irregular beach with lots of sand on one side but not the other. Tombolos maintain a smoother, more natural beach.

They could be used anywhere outside of the Cleveland breakwater. There isn't enough sand to build a natural beach within the breakwater since it basically blocks all littoral transport.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:48:15 PM by surfohio »

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #188 on: May 29, 2008, 12:57:58 PM »
Oh man, I hate those things!!!  Very dangerous for surfing and swimming, not to mention they look very unnatural. 

I am not against the tombolos I've seen on wiki/google on a larger scale, but those Presque Isle formations are not good.

In fact, I worked to convince Chris Ronayne to remove a similar proposal at Edgewater Park under the Lakefront Plan.


Unfortunately, that sometimes is the only way to get the sand back. Ohio has modified the shoreline so much that some beaches lost most of their natural sand transport. Even Miami, Florida has used them. They don't have to be permanant either...

And hey, they're not as unnatural looking as a wind turbine...

« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 12:59:45 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #189 on: May 29, 2008, 01:02:05 PM »
Thanks for posting the pics!! And those would work even at the depth of the lake where the breakwall is located?

I'm not against them being off the breakwall, just at edgewater park, it being one of the few places in the area with naturally breaking waves.

"East Harbor used to be by far Ohio's largest beach, with over 2.5 miles of uninterrupted sand....The southern part was wiped out by a nightmare storm in 1972. The majority of the beach has not been restored due to lack of state funding"

Why does every state on the east coast replenish their beaches with OUR money, and we can't get fed money here???
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 01:04:50 PM by surfohio »

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #190 on: May 29, 2008, 01:56:26 PM »
Thanks for posting the pics!! And those would work even at the depth of the lake where the breakwall is located?

oh no, the water is too deep there for anything.

Why does every state on the east coast replenish their beaches with OUR money, and we can't get fed money here???

Most of our politcians suck and don't give a damn. Marcy Kaptur is the one big exception to this. She's gotten millions in federal funding for Lake Erie. She's arguably the most powerful Great Lakes politician.


Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #191 on: May 29, 2008, 02:21:34 PM »
"They could be used anywhere outside of the Cleveland breakwater. There isn't enough sand to build a natural beach within the breakwater since it basically blocks all littoral transport."

Okay then, I misunderstood. Thats too damn bad.

When the Port relocates, there might be an argument for removal of some of the harbor breakwall. This would allow for some littoral drift, and give Whiskey Island/Wendy Park an honest chance of being a real beach.

Offline theguv

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • my friends usually call me John
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #192 on: May 29, 2008, 03:32:22 PM »
great discussion here. thanks for the many insightful posts.

does anyone have any idea how the proposal to create a marsh and narrow beach along the breakwall would affect the current shoreline?  this idea was floated a few years ago by Roger Thoma at a workshop sponsored by EcoCity Cleveland.  It was later reprinted in the PD.  IMO, it is THE MOST exciting idea I've yet seen proposed for our fair city.  any ideas on the feasibility of this proposal as well as the effects on the current shoreline?  More than just about anything, I wish this idea would become reality!

http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/ideabank/breakwall_habitat.html

thanks!

other relevant links:

EcoCity's IdeaBank for the lakefront
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/ideabank/ideabank_main.html

a study on the market for lakefront housing:
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/lakefront-housing.html
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 03:32:54 PM by theguv »
"The way in which we experience and interpret the world obviously depends very much indeed on the kind of ideas that fill our minds. If they are mainly small, weak, superficial, and incoherent, life will appear insipid, uninteresting, petty, and chaotic."
-E.F. Schumacher

Offline Boreas

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 2019
  • The wooden shoe conspiracy
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #193 on: May 29, 2008, 04:02:14 PM »
Of course state government is mostly responsible for what happened to the lake (and the national government too). It's a Toledo and Sandusky problem just like it's a Cleveland problem.
The ODNR budget has been slashed by more than half over the years.   Who on the forum would accept fees at Ohio State Parks so that they can have a budget to improve Huntington Beach, Edgewater, Wildwood, and Mentor Headlands?  Ohio is one of the few states without entry fees for state parks.
2. Restore marshland. The main reason the lake got dirty and lost clarity actually is not from industrial pollution (though that's responsible for all the Cuyahoga fires). The lake got dirty from too much siltation and runoff. Marshes prevent this. They trap all the silt and runoff before it gets in the lake. This greatly reduces pollution and keeps the water beautiful and clean. To protect the marsh, you need a barrier beach (like East Harbor I mentioned above). Lake Erie used to be sparkling clear when it had its full marsh system. Today, we only have about 10% of the original marsh system left. We destroyed our marshes, and the water got dirty as a result. We also have sloppy agricultural practices that increase runoff and siltation. Buffer strips along creeks and ditches can go a long way in preventing silt and runoff from getting into the major rivers and lake. Ohio (save for Marcy Kaptur who fights incredibly hard for marshland restoration and better agricultural practices) tends to have the attitude of "we just don't give a f$&k about our water." It's not just Lake Erie that is dirty (though at least now it's only dirty in Toledo and Cleveland), it is every single river, creek, and ditch in this state. Ohio's favorite color for water is brown.

Phosphate fertilizer runoff from the Maumee River valley has disrupted the nutrient balance and given the lake its weird look.

Lake Erie's level has always risen and fallen in multiyear cycles.  During high water years, the silt from the streams, with help from littoral currents, formed the ridges that defined the beaches.  There were large pools behind these ridges that were wonderful wildlife habitat.  When people developed that land, they put in ditches or whatever it took to take the water away so that they could have dry land to build on.  I don't know how to undo that. 

Some of the original habitat still exists at Crane, Ottawa, and Arcola Creek preserves.

Offline FrqntFlyr

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 664
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #194 on: May 29, 2008, 04:06:20 PM »
great discussion here. thanks for the many insightful posts.

does anyone have any idea how the proposal to create a marsh and narrow beach along the breakwall would affect the current shoreline?  this idea was floated a few years ago by Roger Thoma at a workshop sponsored by EcoCity Cleveland.  It was later reprinted in the PD.  IMO, it is THE MOST exciting idea I've yet seen proposed for our fair city.  any ideas on the feasibility of this proposal as well as the effects on the current shoreline?  More than just about anything, I wish this idea would become reality!

http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/ideabank/breakwall_habitat.html

thanks!

other relevant links:

EcoCity's IdeaBank for the lakefront
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/ideabank/ideabank_main.html

a study on the market for lakefront housing:
http://www.ecocitycleveland.org/ecologicaldesign/blue/lakefront-housing.html

Cool idea guv -- thanks for posting! 

The article said that this idea was presented as part of the Lakefront Planning process.  However, I don't remember it being a part of the final Lakefront plan.  Guv or anyone else -- Do you know why it was not included in the final plan?

Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #195 on: May 29, 2008, 05:28:48 PM »
does anyone have any idea how the proposal to create a marsh and narrow beach along the breakwall would affect the current shoreline?

That idea is probably just a pipe dream. It would be absurdly expensive, especially considering the average depth along the Cleveland Harbor breakwall. There never was a marsh there in the first place. It's been open Lake Erie water for thousands of years. Cleveland built the breakwall because they needed a harbor (the Cuyahoga is way too small, and there are no bays). There were never wetlands where there's 20 feet of water. Honestly, that idea should be way down the road. We have much more important issues to take care of first.

Before anything like that should happen, the state needs to focus on wetland restoration. This will do wonders for water and wildlife quality. We've destroyed 90% of our wetlands in Ohio, but Kaptur is working hard to get some back. She gets way more support in DC than she does in Ohio.

During high water years, the silt from the streams, with help from littoral currents, formed the ridges that defined the beaches.

Silt doesn't form beaches (it forms mud flats and muck), sand forms beaches, though both get in streams and rivers after rainfall. In big rivers like the Maumee, there actually are a couple "river beaches" near the mouth where sandbars have formed and people anchor their boats to swim. The problem is there is too much silt is in every river, creek, and stream in the state of Ohio. This silt overload gives our water its brown, dirty appearance for much of the year. One of the most interesting observations outsiders make when coming to our state is "how come all the water is so nasty looking?" The only really pretty waters are well offshore in Lake Erie and also around THE hub of Ohio tourism which is the Islands/summer resort area in Northwest Ohio (a major economic incentive in keeping the water clean). There a few sources of silt there and no major cities in that area, so the water stays cleaner. Other parts of the lake can be pretty, but it's only after maybe three of four days straight with no rainfall. Even notoriously dirty Maumee Bay (the dirtiest part of all the Great Lakes) can look good after a week without rain.

Agriculture itself is not the problem, it's the type of agriculture we practice. All it takes is buffer strips of vegetation along waterways to stop the silt overload and reduce fertilizer/chemical runoff. Marcy Kaptur has proposed tax incentives for farmers who grow buffer strips along their streams and ditches (since they lose a little bit of their land). Her goal is to get all of the Great Lakes watershed on board. Currently, I've heard about 30% of the Maumee watershed has grown buffer strips along the creeks and ditches in the farmland areas. It has made a marked difference. The water still has too much silt, but it's better than it was just ten years ago. Doing this with all farmland will improve water quality and reduce siltation/runoff drastically.

Still, we've got to restore marshland if we really want the lake to go back to its original state. Nothing filters water better than marshes. Currently, Wester Basin governments are buying up farms near Lake Erie to turn back into marshes. Many of the parks are expanding too even in the face of state budget cuts. Again, Kaptur is at the helm of this. There is no one in this state who fights harder for Lake Erie, and luckily, she's also one of the most influential people in the U.S. House of Representatives. She is the one responsible for the beautiful WW2 Memorial in DC, so she is very popular and respected, and this crosses party lines despite the fact she is very liberal. The Ohio 9th covers everything from Toledo to Lorain, so it's absolutely vital that pro-Lake Erie people are elected there. Cleveland of course should do the same. There is not a single person in the Lake Erie watershed who should be supporting anyone who doesn't fight for the lake. It is our lifeblood and will be our source of economic recovery. We must protect it at all costs.

The problem is that our state government just doesn't give much economic incentive to clean up Lake Erie (or any body of water for that matter). Hell, they just closed down Crane Creek State Park for the love of Jesus, which was one of the largest public beaches in the state! I'm really worried about the future of the lake given all the recent budget cuts. The parks system in Ohio is going to hell in a handbasket...and couple in all of Bush's false promises of funding for the lakes, and you've got a very depressing situation.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2008, 05:44:35 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline surfohio

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 6118
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #196 on: May 30, 2008, 08:50:19 AM »
Thanks for posting the breakwall links Guv...that website GreenCityBlueLake is incredible.

C-Dawg I think wetlands and marshland restoration is an integral component of any progress here. And the concepts of restoration and development need not be mutually exclusive.

http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/10d-18/point-pelee-national-park-marsh.jpg

Chicago is light years ahead of us. The Lakefront Plan dropped the ball....

This MUST happen in Cleveland:

In Chicago,
protecting the lakefront is the law

The protection of a free and open public lakefront is part of the civic culture of Chicago. Here is the city ordinance that helps to minimize intrusions of development.

Lake Michigan and Chicago Lakefront
Protection Ordinance

CHAPTER 16-4
(CHAPTER 194B*)

The basic policies which shall govern present and future development programs for Chicagoís lakefront are the following:

1) Complete the publicly owned and locally controlled park system along the entire Chicago lakefront.

2) Maintain and enhance the predominantly landscaped, spacious and continuous character of the lakeshore parks.

3) Continue to improve the water quality and ecological balance of Lake Michigan.

4) Preserve the cultural, historical, and recreational heritage of the lakeshore parks.

5) Maintain and improve the formal character and open water vista of Grant Park with no new above-ground structures permitted.

6) Increase the diversity of recreational opportunities while emphasizing lake-oriented leisure time activities.

7) Protect and develop natural lakeshore park and water area for wildlife habitation.

8) Increase personal safety.

9) Design all lake edge and lake construction to prevent detrimental shoreline erosion.

10) Ensure a harmonious relationship between the lakeshore parks and the community edge, but in no instance will further private development be permitted east of Lake Shore Drive.

11) Improve access to the lakeshore parks and reduce through vehicular traffic on secondary park roads.

12) Strengthen the parkway characteristics of Lake Shore Drive and prohibit any roadway of expressway standards.

13) Ensure that all port, water supply, and public facilities are designed to enhance lakefront character.

14) Coordinate all public and private development within the water, park, and community zones.

The Lakefront Plan of Chicago, dated December, 1972, is hereby accepted as an illustration to future development recognizing that specific development proposals will be separately considered for funding and separately evaluated for conformance to the basic policies for Chicagoís lakefront.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO:


Offline C-Dawg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4225
  • Detroit Junior
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #197 on: May 30, 2008, 04:36:01 PM »
^I know, Chicago is way ahead of us. I'd love to see that in Ohio, and there is no reason it can't happen here.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2008, 04:38:35 PM by C-Dawg Njaim »

Offline Ipsilon

  • 408'-Kettering Tower
  • **
  • Posts: 147
    • Cleveland Rising
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #198 on: June 11, 2008, 09:50:06 AM »
It's probably seperate, but I thought the lakefront plan was tied to the goals they set for 2020?

(from the City Planning Commission's website... http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/cpc.html)

Offline jpop

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1532
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #199 on: September 29, 2008, 03:25:20 PM »
Mather Museum to open year round

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Cleveland's Great Lakes Science Center broke ground today on a project that will open the Mather Museum to visitors year round.
WKSU's Karen Schaefer reports:

http://www.wksu.org/news/daily/2008/09/25/23719.mp3
« Last Edit: September 29, 2008, 03:28:10 PM by jpop »

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36675
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #200 on: September 29, 2008, 10:07:08 PM »
 :clap:  :clap:  :clap:
"George Washington could never tell a lie.
Richard Nixon could never tell the truth.
Donald Trump cannot tell the difference."

 -- Mark Shields,  News Hour

Offline jpop

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1532
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #201 on: September 29, 2008, 10:13:44 PM »
I agree .. I think this will be a cool addition to North Coast Harbor.

Offline jpop

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1532
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #202 on: November 19, 2008, 03:49:57 PM »
Great Lakes Science Center Gets $1M To Build Walkway
Walkway To Connect Center To William H. Mather Museum
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/18011001/detail.html

POSTED: 7:19 pm EST November 18, 2008
UPDATED: 7:41 pm EST November 18, 2008


CLEVELAND -- The Great Lakes Science Center was granted $1 million to build a pedestrian walkway connecting the center to the William G. Mather Maritime Museum.

The $3.4 million project will construct a glass and steel 400-foot enclosed connector to the steamship museum, encouraging crossover visitors year-round.

The funding was approved by the Ohio Cultural Facilities Commission.

Offline musky

  • SPRAWL KILLS !!!
  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3506
  • Where there is no vision, the people perish.
    • Cleveland vs. The World
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #203 on: November 19, 2008, 03:52:25 PM »
Excellent!!

Offline X

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7251
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #204 on: November 19, 2008, 06:30:59 PM »
I'm not excited at all.  This is just a barrier to the public's access of the lakefront. :mrgreen:

edit: random emoticon added as per Musky's request.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2008, 01:04:25 PM by X »

Offline musky

  • SPRAWL KILLS !!!
  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3506
  • Where there is no vision, the people perish.
    • Cleveland vs. The World
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #205 on: November 19, 2008, 06:32:42 PM »
Shouldn't you put a emoticon after that statement? Any will do.

Offline jpop

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1532
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #206 on: November 26, 2008, 09:00:54 AM »
Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority chairman envisions vital waterfront development
http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/122769183367090.xml&coll=2&thispage=2
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Tom Breckenridge/Plain Dealer Reporter

The catalyst for a Cleveland comeback lies where the city was born - at the gritty confluence of a river and a Great Lake, a port leader says.

State and local leaders must push for a multibillion-dollar injection of federal money to help move the port from east of the Cuyahoga River's mouth and make way for an "iconic" waterfront district, says lawyer Michael Wager, chairman of the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority.

With the national and local economies mired in bad news, Wager floated an uplifting vision for lake- and riverfront development to a crowd of 100 at a City Club speech Tuesday...
« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 11:09:30 AM by McCleveland »

Offline Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17326
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #207 on: November 26, 2008, 10:12:31 AM »
He also talked of fast-tracking the project and vacating some port land by moving bulk shipping up the river.

Port President Adam Wasserman, who attended the City Club luncheon, said he could foresee public access to the lake on port land, and possibly a park, in five years. The port is working with the city to hire top-flight urban planners to begin detailing redevelopment of port land.


 :clap:

The length of time this project is expected to take has always been the biggest source of pessimism for me.... so this is the best part of the article to me.
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline jpop

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1532
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #208 on: November 26, 2008, 10:17:43 AM »
The length of time this project is expected to take has always been the biggest source of pessimism for me.... so this is the best part of the article to me.

That's understandable. I feel the same way .. but at the same time, I realize that this is something that is planning for Cleveland's future, and it will take years to establish something solid. This will establish something new and foundational, and I see this as being primarily something for future generations of Clevelanders, which, in my opinion, is what any real visionary plan should be for.

Offline Ctownrocks1

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
Re: Cleveland: Lakefront Development News
« Reply #209 on: December 02, 2008, 06:41:21 PM »
Cleveland port seeks experts to craft grand vision
Posted by Tom Breckenridge/Plain Dealer Reporter
December 02, 2008 15:25PM

CLEVELAND -- By next fall, port leaders want a master plan showing how the port's gritty expanse can transform into an attractive maritime neighborhood.

Port staffers told members of the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority board on Tuesday that they are ready to solicit a planning consultant and financial adviser to chart the long-term redevelopment of the land west of Cleveland Browns Stadium.

That redevelopment is expected to unfold over the next five to 20 years. The plan calls for moving docks and warehouses from 100 acres near the stadium to a new home -- a 200-acre peninsula at East 55th Street in Lake Erie...

http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2008/12/clevelands_port_seeks_experts.html




« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 11:10:20 AM by McCleveland »

Remove Ads