Northeastern Ohio Sewer District presents 90% design for Stonebrook restoration, highlights park amenities and timeline

The Northeastern Ohio Sewer District and its design consultants presented a 90% design update March 17 to the Cleveland Heights City Council Committee of the Whole for the Stonebrook restoration and an accompanying 60-acre park that spans Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights.

Consultant Glenn Valentine said the project’s primary goal is to “restore the . . . brook and to create a very well functioning restored river with a . . . accessible flood plain to help handle floodwaters.” The district’s representative, Steve Council, opened by calling the presentation the project’s “90% update.”

The design accepts an “upper confluence” option the team says performs best hydraulically and creates a broad flood plain that, in a 100-year event, occupies roughly one-third of the park. The district will direct, manage and pay for the substantial earthwork required to remove roughly 150 years of lakebed sediment and regrade the site, designers said.

The plan includes a central shared-use trail through the flood plain, a Midpark Crossing bridge connecting Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights, constructed wetlands to filter street runoff, multiple gateways and a series of promontories and overlooks. Renderings show a dynamic landscape that will change over decades as pioneer species establish and are eventually succeeded by hardwood canopy. Justin, the consultant operating the presentation, said the team has engaged more than “2,200 community voices as participants” in the public process and expects a few hundred more in upcoming events.

Cost highlights presented to the council identified roughly $2.9 million earmarked for user amenities developed from public input, with park circulation and gateways representing other significant expense lines. Councilor Bosch observed that Cleveland Heights’ portion of a roughly $7 million figure shown in the slides would be about 35%, approximately $2.4 million; the presentation confirmed Cleveland Heights’ share is calculated as 35% and that contingency is included in that number.

Design details described during the presentation included: a twin steel I‑beam bridge with heavy wood decking (described as 2½ inches thick); asphalt for primary accessible trails with informal grass tertiary trails; planting palettes emphasizing native species in the flood plain and upland promontories; and site furnishings including 19 benches, two bike-repair stations and two swings at overlooks. Designers also said conduit for future lighting is included in the cost estimate, but no permanent park lighting plan is finalized.

Council members raised implementation questions: one member asked whether Cleveland Heights has a deer-management program (Shaker Heights does) and how sapling loss to deer would be handled; designers said plant species selection and concentrated, protectable shrub strips and tree guards will be used to reduce early damage. Another councilor asked about minority‑ and women‑owned business participation; district staff said the bidding package will include a business‑opportunity program with recommended participation percentages for minority-, women- and small‑business enterprises.

Next steps shown on the schedule: a public forum in April to present the 90% design to the public, final design completion and design review comments by May, department reviews and permitting through the summer, bidding in the fourth quarter and construction anticipated at the end of the year or early next year.

The project presentation was discussion-only at the Committee of the Whole meeting; no final council approvals or votes on project funding were recorded in the transcript.

Designer quotes and detailed drawings shown in the presentation were described as the plan at the 90% design milestone; staff repeated that some landscape and circulation elements will be paid by the district while other trails, parking and parking-adjacent improvements would be paid by the two cities.