urban manna

What i like most about these concepts...is that they are taking a look at what the city needs now, but also taking into consideration what the city will need as it grows. Concept 3 is the most iconic, but it is also the concept that gives the most flexibility to Downtown development. We have a usable space that pedestrians can use at all times of the day. The underneath portion of the structure can be programed itself...designed to be a covered location for markets or festivals. We can leave both Ontario and Superior open now...but eventually close them as traffic needs change. If you think about it, Public Square was last a unified park about 140 years ago. Now we are talking about remaking the square for the next 140 years. Who knows what the traffic needs of Cleveland will be 3 and 4 generations down the road?! We need to focus on building a space that is iconic and meaningful for the citizens and businesses that will use it. Building a public space that will still be celebrated by Clevelanders at the turn of the next century. Public Square is this generation's "Group Plan".....just read the opening for the original report by Daniel Burnham to the city of Cleveland in 1903. They were focused on creating a public space for the benefit of the city's future. This is how we need to think now: (It takes a little while to load) http://cplorg.cdmhost.com/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/p128201coll0&CISOPTR=2273&REC=2

DCA just lauched a new site design - www.downtowncleveland.org

This is the only thing that Strang said that i agree with. I would add that placing the convention center and medical mart in UC is not much better than the East Bank. You think East Bank of the Flats isn't connected...try driving convention traffic 4 miles from your largest concentration of hotels. Someone made the comment about bio-tech firms and other medical technology firms being located in University Circle and that because of that.....UC is now the NEW Downtown. I think we should look at the facts. While there are a number of research facilities in University Circle....how many actual Medical/Bio-tech COMPANIES (tax contributing companies) are located in UC? I would argue that more are located in either Midtown and Beachwood that in University Circle. I'm not saying that UC isn't a center of Medicine, bio-tech research or medical technology usage......it obviously is. But a Medical Mart is about business....it's about sales. The Med Mart isn't going to just be targeting UH and the Clinic for sales of products (if it were...it wouldn't work).......it is going to be targeting hospitals and doctors from all over the country and the world. And what is a visitor going to do in UC after 8pm....walk to Little Italy from the Intercontinental? In addition to attracting visitors, I would think that a Medical Mart should spur business growth near its location. Wouldn't it make sense then to choose a location where there are a variety of existing real estate options open to companies? Downtown not only provides the lodging, transportation access and entertainment options necessary to make a convention center work....it also offers the best environment for new and smaller businesses to grow. University Circle may be the research capital of Cleveland....but Downtown is still THE location where tax paying/entrepreneurial business takes place. Just because University Circle is the center for research.....does not mean that it should be the location for Medical/Bio-tech COMPANIES to locate. Just look at all the technology companies that already call Downtown home....i think it is far lesser of a stretch for Downtown to succeed as a center for bio-tech and medical device COMPANIES than it is for UC to succeed. Plus...one of the biggest issues being lost here is the fact that MMPI (who is going to be "on the hook" for the success of this thing) is in complete agreement with the commissioners as to WHERE the convention center and Med mart should be located. If they had serious BUSINESS concerns...i don't think that they would lock themselves into a 20 year deal.

Frank is in an election year....of course he is going to come out from behind the scenes and be visible. While i do think that he is looking out for a legitimate concern....it would be MMPI's responsibility anyway. These are the things that the public is concerned with: 1 - Public financing: is it available to pay for this project? The answer is yes...the tax is growing as we speak. Unlike NY...we have funding 2 - Contract: MMPI will sign a contract that legally binds them to all the cost over runs. If they do the research and they determine that the Mall site is the best....and then they find out later that they DO need to rebuild the foundation....they have to pay for it. MMPI has hired one of the foremost consultants to do their research....i don't think they would choose the site if the foundation was in question...especially because THEY have to pay for it. 3 - Timing: Get the project done! There are some other interesting things i've noticed about the numbers floating around..... - The Forest City site cost estimate does not include the cost for the transportation overhaul that would be required to make the convention center work. New roads, bridges and other access points would need to be created. I can only guess at what cost these would be created - On the flip side, if MMPI (a private company) is the chief operator of the convention center, they can submit for Federal and State historic tax credits for the project. On top of that...the Mall is a historic site and could recieve conservation easements as well as other financing for the project. All of these have not been taken into consideration with the cost estimate for the Mall site! The difference in cost between these two sites is not just $100 million. It could very well be $200 - $225 million

no...that wasn't exactly my question. Why is a narrower foot print (which if you look at the potential footprint of a TC convention center...the footprint isn't that much more narrow than Pittsburgh's) so much worse than a more square foot print with an equal square footage?

The examples of Columbus and Pittsburgh are a little odd considering the fact that Pittsburgh is losing money hand over fist with their place and Columbus (from what i've heard) doesn't even utilize their full foot print. I understand the need for a large continuous floor plate, but is there anyone on UO that can back up with facts why a large, but more narrow floor plate is such much worse a design than the large, more square plates of Pittsburgh and Columbus? I understand that a large foot print is necessary, but there are huge assumptions being made that just because there is an existing site...that it is the better location. The costs from what i've heard would be enourmous to modernize the current site. You are looking at a complete overhaul of Mall B and a deepening of the base floor of the current site. Plus...all these comments about a new convention center bridging to the lakefront wouldn't happen anyway. There are severl planners and developers that have said that the size of a CC that we would need in order to bridge those tracks....would be so far above and beyond what this city needs....there would be no way of recouping our costs. It's clear that there are a lot of you that don't like the TC site. But the current site is not a walk in the park either. Just because we don't know how we would utilize the current space...isn't a good argument for maintaining the current location.

I just spent 15 minutes reading everyone's comments about the TC site for the CC. I am surprised that the majority of you think this is a bad site. Not only am I shocked that there is so much disapproval of the site...but i am shocked by the reasons why you are against the site: - Forest City's involvement - There isn't enough space for a CC - There is no room for additional development These are the major reason why some of you feel that the TC site is bad? First of all...we can debate Forest City's involvement till the cows come home. Some of us see them as a neglectful, corporate giant who hasn't done anything to improve their current properties of TC and Scranton Peninsula, while others see them as a reputable Fortune 500 company who has the capabilities to create a massive spin-off development off the new CC site. But lets put aside the Forest City debate and just talk purely about the TC location... "There isn't enough space": What!? Not enough space? We aren't trying to build another IX center. We are trying to build a convention center that meets modern standards and is built into an urban fabric. As was mentioned earlier...the right architecture and engineering can make it work. A couple years ago an group of European urban planning experts came to Cleveland to do a study of opportunities the city could take advantage of. The result of their trip? Where did they say we should be focusing our efforts? The river. They said that the Cuyahoga represented the best opportunity for development because it is where the city was founded, it is still where a tremendous amount of commerce takes place, it is where it is easier to build connecting infrastructure to the rest of the city, and it is easier to build density. The lakefront is important...but the river is too and we have an opportunity with this development to make great strides. If you've noticed in the news lately, the Ohio Canal Corridor will be extending the Cuyahoga Valley Towpath trail into Downtown, via Scranton Peninsula. Near the abandoned B&O Terminal there will be a brand new park called Canal Basin Park...3-times the size of Public Square. The other side of the river is already on its way to being revived. With a CC on the TC site...it isn't going to limit development....it is going to spur development. Come on everybody...the river isn't that[/b big of a boundary! You can easily bridge it. In addition to the importance of the river and the potential for other development, the Tower City site has other extremely valuable assets: Direct connection to 2 major hotels (already in existence) Direct connection to 4 major transit lines: Red Line, Blue, Green and Healthline Direct access to the Gateway Complex Centrally located between major entertainment districts - The Warehouse District, East 4th and Gateway There are more reasons...but these are some of the most glaring ones that matter to conventions and people who attend conventions. We need to stop and look at the facts...this is a good thing for the city and we will thrive because we will be able to use this as catalyst for other development. Cost overruns are still a concern and we have to make sure our public officials are fiscally responsible....but the Tower City site is the best option for a new CC

MyTwoSense, Are you talking about the proposal to bridge over the railroad tracks? I recently had a discussion with someone about that proposal because i used to be in support of building the convention center there. However, i was told that there are two main hindrances to placing the new convention center there. 1) The cost of building that land bridge over the tracks is something like $200/square foot (i'll have to double check on those numbers)....and that is just for the infrastructure to support the buildings. In a sense you are constructing a similiar "stilted" building complex like Tower City. 2) Because of the change in security guidlines since 9-11, it is against code to have a public building built over existing rail lines. Tower City is fine because it was Grandfathered in. I do think that the creation of another mall that extending to the lakefront woud be compelling. Everyone knows i'm a sucker for green space.....it is just cost prohibative.

The Commissioners are hiding behind the time line on this one....when they are the reason for this "sneaking" up as an opportunity! Over a year ago, the Commissioners got a group of people together (including reps from Forest City and Sherwin Williams) to help the county attract a medical mart here. In the Spring of 06, the rep in charge of the group (from Forest City) came back to Dimora and told them that they had the Medical Mart ready and waiting.....Dimora's response.....he said that he couldn't do anything at the time because it was an election year. I have very good friend that heard this story directly from the Forest City reps mouth. In frustration, the private sector team that had pulled together in order to attract the medical mart....walked away. They knew about this deal for over a year! And they just thrust this upon us now. I agree with all of you on the sales tax being regressive....i don't like it at all. Dimora knew this would be an unpopular decision, but instead of jumping on the gun right away (when we could have had time to debate this more thoroughly) he sat on his hands until it was best for him. The fact is...we don't have time now to debate. I don't like the tax hike, but this project's positives still far outweigh the negativity of the tax. The unfortunate decision that i have had to make is this: There are very few projects/laws/issues that i am 100% for or against. My support for this project is at about 60 - 70%....there is a good portion of me that knows there is a better way....but i realize that we don't have the luxury of time any more. Passing a tax that is only a quarter of a percent (even if it is not the best way) is better than the alternative of us losing this opportunity to Boston or Pittsburgh (two cities salivating over the chance to land this)

You know... it is interesting to hear people talk about the Gateway project not doing what it promised. If anything the last playoffs to hit Cleveland just a couple of months ago...show that it has. Just 10 years ago (1997), when the Indians were playing for the championship, the Gateway Neighborhood had the follow: 7 restaurants 36 residential units 0 hotels! Since then...There has been over 300 million dollars worth of investment in the district. Today Gateway Neighborhood has: 31 full service restaurants (with 6 more on the way) 729 residential Units 6 hotels In addition to that investment, just look at the difference between Downtown Cleveland during the Playoffs and the city of any other team we played against (with maybe the exception of Washington). New Jersey, Auburn Hills, and San Antonio all have arena's in the middle of parking lots.....their playoff games didn't even come close to generating the kind of impact that ours had because of the Q's location in the heart of the city. Even our away games generated sell outs and thousands cramming into Downtown to be a part of the excitement. That is a unique impact that Gateway has provided. We see these impacts everyday...but we so easily forget what our city was before this project happened. Now, we can't even imagine Downtown without the complex. If sports could have that much of an impact, how much more would a concrete economic engine of a Medical Mart provide? This opportunity is at our door step and the direction is clear, Cleveland and the Medical Mart are a perfect match.....we should build this Convention Center. To the point on where the center should be built. The reason that i say...Tower City....is that it connects so many assets. But above most, it connects an asset that is largely forgotten because of its larger more visible brother....the Cuyahoga River. Everyone talks about lakefront access...."why can't we do what Chicago did!" Chicago... Chicago... Chicago. No doubt Lakefront access is very important and should be expanded (and sooner than 50 years from now...but that is a different story). However, a group of European planners came to Cleveland recently and did a case study on Cleveland and its development. What they said, was surprising to alot of people....but it makes sense. They said that our greatest asset was the river, not the lake. Cleveland's entire history has revolved around the river. The first settlers, industry, travel, recreation, and the growth of the city all have started at the river. The river and the Flats connect several districts: Ohio City, Tremont, Downtown....if we develop the convention center along the river and provide an anchor from which we can further develop the flats...we will do far more good than any other location in the city. Just look at all the pieces. Just down the road from the proposed Tower City site, the new Canal Basin Park will be established (just a couple years away from development). This park is twice as large as Public Square and will create the beginning of the Towpath and a huge park between Settlers landing and Columbus Rd. The Towpath will run across a large swath of the Scranton Penisula....providing an excellent green anchor for residential development along the river's edge. Sherwin Williams just recently sold land along the river that is just a parking lot...and the word on the street is that this will become a development of Condo's. Plus you have the added advantage that Tower City provides with the Mall, connected hotels, connected access to the Federal Courthouse, connection to the hub for public transportation, proximity to Gateway, close proximity to the highways, etc. Any other spot doesn't provide that kind of connectivity. If the center is built on the site of the existing convention center (even though it is municipally owned), it doesn't provide a large enough footprint. Plus the fact that you would only have 3 hotels in proximity (none have indoor connectivity to the new center), not a great amount of retail (virtually none), and it doesn't help to connect districts....rather it helps further the classic Cleveland problem of developing "nodes" of activity that aren't connected. Tower City provides synergy....synergy is what we need more of.

THe medical field is at its peek.We have to figure the energy crisis that is right now in the for front of everything. There should be a building selling new energy devices not medical devices Come on...let's stop with the anecdotal comments and let's start with reality. Is the market for energy production a booming field? Yes....but to say that the medical field has peaked....that is ridiculous. Look at the market, look at the trends in demographic shifts, look at the percentage of our local economy that the Medical industry makes up and the surge in which that percentage has grown (in the past 4 years alone it has grown 25%!). Medicine and Medical Technology are not just the future, they are our present. Finally, instead of us continually looking to the day when we will have a strong industry again in Cleveland....we have one! And it isn't an industry that is doing well just in comparison to other cities of our size or of our region. Cleveland's Medical prowess competes on a global scale. This is an industry that TODAY, has put us on the world map! Royal families fly from around the globe to Cleveland for care. Doctors and industry professionals recognize Cleveland's a source of leading medical research. Companies recognize a fertile soil here in Cleveland to develop new medical technology and millions of dollars in investment is happening every year as a result. There is a reason that Merchandise Properties has invested over $500,000 to research the possibility of a Medical Mart here. They see the potential and they know the market. This isn't a "good Samaritan" gesture to a struggling city; this is a business investment in a thriving Medical Capital of the world. Here are some reasons that this project is perfect for us: The Economist Intelligence Unit posted a report on the top cities in the world for Business travel (http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/BUSINESS_TRIP_INDEX.pdf). They ranked 127 cities, worldwide. Cleveland was ranked 6....in the world. Why is this so import? People who attend medical conventions, unless you are a higher up doctor/surgeon, pay their own way to attend the convention. They need to for their constant training needs. Because of this, conventions try to locate places that have a lower cost for people to travel to. Considering Cleveland's affordability, its high ranking on the business travelers index, a medical mart that showcases that latest in medical technology and its reputation as a leader in Health Care.....what convention wouldn't want to locate here? This project is so much more about attracting a medical mart than it is about building a convention center. Medical Mart needs to have a convention facility because of the convention traffic they create. So really, what we are talking about is how badly to we want a major 100 million dollar company to move to Cleveland? A company that by itself will fill 800,000 sq ft. of one our city's signature buildings. A company that will draw tens of thousands of people down the newly created Euclid Corridor (driving economic investment along the corridor and renewing the energy of Cleveland's most cherished avenue). A company that is looking to create a medical mart that would create one of the only places in the WORLD where an individual can go see all the latest in medical technology, watch those devices be used in the top hospitals in the world, and purchase those devices to take back with them. Aside from the medical mart, the construction of a new convention center will allow us to draw in other conventions that typically locate out in the burbs...thus increasing the development and economic impact to Downtown. We would have a world class facility to attract events like the RNC and other major boosts to this city. Do i really need to go on? For a mere quarter of a percent raise in the sales tax...we are reaping so much more. As to where the convention center should be placed...it should be connected to Tower City and finally allow for the development along the Cuyahoga. In addition to the development this would bring to the Tower City side of the river....hopefully this would finally jump start the Ratners into developing Scranton Peninsula. It has sat vacant for far too long and it is time to move forward.

Why can't we use Tax abatement in a more constructive way to build green. Give Developers an incentive to not only develop land, BUT develop green space around that land. example: if you build a development in an urban area, and have a small percentage of green space, then you only receive 8 years. If you develop significant green space around your development (a square footage to be determined by the city planning commission), then you will receive a 16 year abatement. Developments are great, but every time i take the rapid into Tower City, i look south when the train is passing over the flats....i see the desolate Scranton Peninsula. That space could be converted into so much, and yet it just sits. To the north, Stonebridge is taking advantage of the abatements, but there is no green space what so ever. Green space impacts the value of ALL the land surrounding it...thus increasing property values...and eventually..tax revenue. Not to mention the fact that it raises that quality of life we ALL enjoy. I know that there are people that say expansive green space isn't a crucial issue in downtown development; there are plenty of successful major cities that don't have alot of green space. Quite frankly, i don't care if other cities don't have as much green space in their urban core...Cleveland is know for its green spaces in its outer ring....the same should be true in its core. I want a unique city that meets Clevelander's desires. I agree...lets build green, but lets LITERALLY build green and not just energy efficiency.

friend of mine who is pretty involved in the city of Cleveland let me know about it. I checked it out for a while, and i love the intelligent discourse. Refreshing to say the least! geez "intelligent discourse"....i'm starting to sound like an English Prof! Yikes! Where is the Dumb and Dumber DVD?

i agree, this is a negotiation strategy. The abatement will stay. However i do like the healthy discourse this is providing. Questioning a good proposal to make it better is always in the best interest of the people. I think the fear is that because certain politicians have meddled (and ruined) things in the past...this is just history repeating itself. But I don't see it that way Tax abatements aren't the only thing keeping people in the city...I don't care what Doug Price says. The facts are that the market has shifted, and there are several huge factors pointing towards urbanization of metropolitan areas. People are crying out for density, diversity, and authenticity where they live. They want culture...they want a true neighborhood. These are the things that people in the suburbs say are "intangibles". But when you have them....in you life day-in and day-out...they are as valuable and as tangible to you as the mortar between the bricks of your foundation. These are things the suburbs can't provide....and these are things that Cleveland can. And people are willing to pay for them. The market wants to live in the city...the developers know that already. They just want to increase the profit margin (which i don't blame them for....i'm just trying to bring a little REALITY to the "the sky is falling" cries). Cleveland is surging forward (tax abatements are a peice), and the mayor needs to take a stand. I agree with Phillip's comment that "we aren't over the hill yet". The abatements need to stay, but mayor needs to step up to the plate and flex some muscle here. Not in an idiotic and meaningless sort of way....but in a way that says, "Cleveland will only be as great as the strength of ALL its citizens. Not one group over the other, but ALL" That is the fiduciary responsibility of the mayoral office, and Frank would be incompetent if he DIDN'T think the way he is thinking.

I have to disagree with the comment that Frank "doesn't get it". I think he gets it, the report shows, point blank, that tax abatements work. They bring more people into the city, help raise tax revenues for the city, and help redevelop the physical infrastructure of the Cleveland. The issues isn't whether they work or not....the issue is HOW they work and how they affect the entire city. How is it that a tax abatements RAISE tax revenues? The reason is they raise the value of the land that surrounds the newer developments...thus raising the surrounding properties tax rate. If these new developments are moving into lower income areas, this hike in taxes is disproportionately affecting Cleveland's lower income population...i think that Frank sees this and is being cautious. The tax abatements definitely benefit me...and i could not move into the city without them, but the responsibility of the mayor is to manage the whole city. I think these tax abatements are good and need to stay as is, but lets have a little more balanced discussion about the issues at hand. Is there a better alternative that helps the whole city. Perhaps you could target tax Abatements to specific areas around the city. Concentrate development in high density urban areas (like Dowtown, Ohio City, Tremont, Midtown) by giving them the maximum 15 years of tax abatement. In other areas, reduce the tax abatement to 10 years.