The Galleria rendering was proposed to the Cleveland Aquarium Group.

Can we lock this thread until any concrete news comes out?  It is turning into a p!ssing match, and it's giving me a headache, and I'm not even a moderator.

Wow, that would be a terrific re-use of the Galleria.  Probably wouldn't even need to use the whole thing either, so you could consolidate tenants in the rest of the buildings.  I know this is the minority view, but I really don't care if the aquarium is built near the lake.  Considering that most of the exhibits will be salt water (I presume) or fresh water tropical, I find the lake proximity thing kind of a superficial association.  I would much rather see new anchors like this built in areas that could reinforce existing urban amenities and add some street life to downtown.

 

Because any aquarium proposal will require significant public dollars to start up, and may require public dollars for operation, there is no way that two will get built.  I don't think it's defeatist, I think it's prudent public finance and I think it's reality, and I think that is just fine.  And if the city does back the CA proposal, IMHO, there is zero chance the "boutique" people will be able or willing to build a second aquarium.

 

Good comments. There will be some indigenous exhibits--as most good aquariums have to better educate people on their local aquatic resources and to generate a better respect and involvement in their conservation/protection. The Tennessee Aquarium ties them all in from mountain stream habitat all the way to the Atlantic Ocean and beyond. It is really clever! It would contain habitats from around the world. Personally, like you, I am not insistent 'it MUST be on the water" I like the idea of adaptive reuse and to follow the 'non-shoreline' encroachment philosophy as outlined in that essay above attached to the photo---which New Orleans probably wished it had followed several lifetimes ago! I think by doing something right the first time is what will gain better long term public support for such---rather than jumping on the desperate 'let's get this aquarium done quickly at the PH'  parade. There is little margin for error in having an aquarium fail. If it does, general perception would likely shun any future attempts with a mentality of.. "Awww..we tried that before and it failed" That which could result from a lack of public understanding between two very different approaches and philosophies. That we do not need. An aquarium is not 'just an aquarium' There is so much more than water and being an over-sized aquarium store.

 

Aren't you assuming that there is a parade?  That's disingenuous to think the everyone is for that project or wants it just to say we have an aquarium.  If any group of people is in the "do it right the first time" camp it's those of us here.

 

I believe we can have the smaller property that Jacobs and his partners have proposed along with a larger Cleveland Aquarium.

 

Right now Jacobs plan is just that, a preliminary plan, nothing set in stone.  Who knows if down the line if he will reach out to others to get more expert opinions as to what will work so that - further down the line - a larger facility can be built that does not overlap what is being built on his property?

 

this thread has really gone down hill as we've gotten of track of what is proposed and gone with what we would like to see.

I don't know, I don't think this thread is so bad.  It's not based on total conjecture- two groups have indeed proposed building aquariums, and both would require public money.  And the Galleria suggestion was interesting.

How would an aquarium at the Galleria compare in size (square footage) to the Jacobs and the Cleveland Aquarium proposals?

 

 

thats what i was wondering too. which is bigger? not sure how much that matters tho.

 

otherwise, the galleria site is intriguing and as good as any. it's definately more creative thinking. i like it.

Wow, that would be a terrific re-use of the Galleria.  Probably wouldn't even need to use the whole thing either, so you could consolidate tenants in the rest of the buildings.  I know this is the minority view, but I really don't care if the aquarium is built near the lake.  Considering that most of the exhibits will be salt water (I presume) or fresh water tropical, I find the lake proximity thing kind of a superficial association.  I would much rather see new anchors like this built in areas that could reinforce existing urban amenities and add some street life to downtown.

 

Because any aquarium proposal will require significant public dollars to start up, and may require public dollars for operation, there is no way that two will get built.  I don't think it's defeatist, I think it's prudent public finance and I think it's reality, and I think that is just fine.  And if the city does back the CA proposal, IMHO, there is zero chance the "boutique" people will be able or willing to build a second aquarium.

 

Good comments. There will be some indigenous exhibits--as most good aquariums have to better educate people on their local aquatic resources and to generate a better respect and involvement in their conservation/protection. The Tennessee Aquarium ties them all in from mountain stream habitat all the way to the Atlantic Ocean and beyond. It is really clever! It would contain habitats from around the world. Personally, like you, I am not insistent 'it MUST be on the water" I like the idea of adaptive reuse and to follow the 'non-shoreline' encroachment philosophy as outlined in that essay above attached to the photo---which New Orleans probably wished it had followed several lifetimes ago! I think by doing something right the first time is what will gain better long term public support for such---rather than jumping on the desperate 'let's get this aquarium done quickly at the PH'  parade. There is little margin for error in having an aquarium fail. If it does, general perception would likely shun any future attempts with a mentality of.. "Awww..we tried that before and it failed" That which could result from a lack of public understanding between two very different approaches and philosophies. That we do not need. An aquarium is not 'just an aquarium' There is so much more than water and being an over-sized aquarium store.

 

Aren't you assuming that there is a parade?  That's disingenuous to think the everyone is for that project or wants it just to say we have an aquarium.  If any group of people is in the "do it right the first time" camp it's those of us here.

 

I believe we can have the smaller property that Jacobs and his partners have proposed along with a larger Cleveland Aquarium.

 

Right now Jacobs plan is just that, a preliminary plan, nothing set in stone.  Who knows if down the line if he will reach out to others to get more expert opinions as to what will work so that - further down the line - a larger facility can be built that does not overlap what is being built on his property?

 

this thread has really gone down hill as we've gotten of track of what is proposed and gone with what we would like to see.

 

If it is going off track, then let's not make this into a dramatic "Jacob's Vs. C.A." thing. The latest was about the concept of re-using an exiting building on 9th--and the differences in philosophies. How about taking a look at the rendering and see the many fine features...the waterfalls, the aquarium windows, the functioning roof top gardens, the observation perch. That is why the photo was posted..... to show a possibility.

This whole CA / Galleria concept is great, but seems very pie-in the sky right now. Are there any concrete details surrounding that proposal? Is it even a real proposal that CA and/or others are actively working towards (with an achievable timeframe) or just hopeful thinking? If it's the latter then I don't know what's being debated. Yeah, that would be great, but so would a lot of things we talk about on UO.

 

I wouldn't tell Jacobs, or anyone else, to stop their plan, just because someone is hoping that something better might come along in a few years. If that's what we're doing, then I agree with DocBroc...let's just suspend discussion until something substantive comes along.

^Yeah, you're right that the Galleria proposal is probably just daydreaming as much as anything.  However, re. the Powerhouse plan, it's not a matter of telling Jacobs to drop his aquarium idea, it's whether or not you give him $9M of public money to make it happen.

^Yeah, you're right that the Galleria proposal is probably just daydreaming as much as anything. However, re. the Powerhouse plan, it's not a matter of telling Jacobs to drop his aquarium idea, it's whether or not you give him $9M of public money to make it happen.

 

Isn't it technically $4.5 million?  I think they already have half of the $9 mil secured.  At any rate, yes, $4.5 million of public money is nothing to scoff at.

^Yikes- you're right. $4.5M in public money.  Man that thing would be small.  Still maybe cool though.

^Yeah, you're right that the Galleria proposal is probably just daydreaming as much as anything.  However, re. the Powerhouse plan, it's not a matter of telling Jacobs to drop his aquarium idea, it's whether or not you give him $9M of public money to make it happen.

 

 

My answer to that would be "No" I cannot see financing what could very likely be an over-sized aquarium store at 55,000 sqf. 

I still don't understand the objections to the size.  The one in Pittsburgh is smaller than 55k and I still thought it was great. Have you ever seen a really big Octopus?

When housing large animals, or those which need plenty of space like sharks, size matters. There are other factors about why it matters as well. Indeed, a smaller one could be of quality, but that is bordering something that will not become a destination type aquarium--and soon the novelty will wear off. Aquariums need a draw to work, and they have to be impacting/imposing.

 

The Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit is small, but of very good quality. We already have that right NOW, yet many people do not know it. The PH idea probably would not give us a whole lot more than we already have.

When housing large animals, or those which need plenty of space like sharks, size matters. There are other factors about why it matters as well. Indeed, a smaller one could be of quality, but that is bordering something that will not become a destination type aquarium--and soon the novelty will wear off. Aquariums need a draw to work, and they have to be impacting/imposing.

 

The Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit is small, but of very good quality. We already have that right NOW, yet many people do not know it. The PH idea probably would not give us a whole lot more than we already have.

 

Do we know what types of animals/exhibits this project will have?

 

Has anyone here been to a aquarium managed by this group?

 

Why can't we wait to here more, before saying it will not work?

When housing large animals, or those which need plenty of space like sharks, size matters. There are other factors about why it matters as well. Indeed, a smaller one could be of quality, but that is bordering something that will not become a destination type aquarium--and soon the novelty will wear off. Aquariums need a draw to work, and they have to be impacting/imposing.

 

The Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit is small, but of very good quality. We already have that right NOW, yet many people do not know it. The PH idea probably would not give us a whole lot more than we already have.

 

Do we know what types of animals/exhibits this project will have?

 

Has anyone here been to a aquarium managed by this group?

 

Why can't we wait to here more, before saying it will not work?

 

Just curious...  When was the last time you visited the Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit?

When housing large animals, or those which need plenty of space like sharks, size matters. There are other factors about why it matters as well. Indeed, a smaller one could be of quality, but that is bordering something that will not become a destination type aquarium--and soon the novelty will wear off. Aquariums need a draw to work, and they have to be impacting/imposing.

 

The Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit is small, but of very good quality. We already have that right NOW, yet many people do not know it. The PH idea probably would not give us a whole lot more than we already have.

 

Do we know what types of animals/exhibits this project will have?

 

Has anyone here been to a aquarium managed by this group?

 

Why can't we wait to here more, before saying it will not work?

 

Just curious...  When was the last time you visited the Cleveland Zoo's aquatics exhibit?

 

Great ask a question instead of answering a question.  My last visit was in April, although I dont think we went into the aquatic center.

MTS, If you read back through this thread...  You will have had the question answered. I attempted to address them several times.

MTS, If you read back through this thread...  You will have had the question answered. I attempted to address them several times.

 

No it hasn't.  Several people have asked. 

 

So Ill ask again, has anyone been to an aquarium managed by this group?

Don't know about a lot of others, but yes, as a matter of fact I have. The question I was referring to was the question of sizes of such exhibits as people were talking about. 

I just saw this amazing video... how sweet would it be if we had something like this here...

 

Kuroshio Sea - 2nd largest aquarium tank in the world - (song is Please don't go by Barcelona)

 

 

<object width="400" height="225"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=5606758&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=ffffff&fullscreen=1" /><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=5606758&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=ffffff&fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="225"></embed></object><p><a href="http://vimeo.com/5606758">Kuroshio Sea - 2nd largest aquarium tank in the world - (song is Please don't go by Barcelona)</a> from <a href="http://vimeo.com/theradblog">Jon Rawlinson</a> on <a href="http://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

 

(Give this some time to load before watching...otherwise you won't have smooth playback)

 

This was shot at the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium in Japan. kaiyouhaku.com/en/

 

The music is "Please don't go" by Barcelona.

PLEASE BUY THIS SONG ON THE iTUNES STORE: bit.ly/1zAVu

Barcelona's website: myspace.com/barcelona

Buy the album Absolutes by Barcelona on the iTunes store: bit.ly/o57OL

Watch Barcelona's response to this video: bit.ly/zGYZw

 

Download the desktop wallpaper: bit.ly/19rTC5

 

The main tank called the "Kuroshio Sea" holds 7,500-cubic meters (1,981,290 gallons) of water and features the world's second largest acrylic glass panel, measuring 8.2 meters by 22.5 meters with a thickness of 60 centimeters. Whale sharks and manta rays are kept amongst many other fish species in the main tank.

 

My family visited this past August, and we spent a day at the Zoo and Aquatic Displays...In comment to the size...it is correct to say, the PH will most likely be the same square footage, but most likely have a WOW factor the Zoo lacks.  That WOW factor only benefits the visitors...and the care and set up for the Aquatic life would be of question.  I would still like to support the idea of the existing Galleria to be transformed into a Class A Aquarium...the reuse of an exceptional location.

My family visited this past August, and we spent a day at the Zoo and Aquatic Displays...In comment to the size...it is correct to say, the PH will most likely be the same square footage, but most likely have a WOW factor the Zoo lacks. That WOW factor only benefits the visitors...and the care and set up for the Aquatic life would be of question. I would still like to support the idea of the existing Galleria to be transformed into a Class A Aquarium...the reuse of an exceptional location.

 

While I have no idea if the Galleria would be suitable for an aquarium, it would be nice to have a tourist attraction at that location that would help pull visitors from north coast harbor into downtown.

We actually met with the Aquarium group, and they were very interested in the Galleria, however, I believe they still have their primary interest focused on the Water front.  I have also done a little research on developing an Urban Greenhouse within the Galleria.  One of the number one attractions in New York City is the Science Barge...The Galleria could be developed after that model...

A certain local paper that I won't give a link to is reporting that Mayor Jackson has proposed for the city to lend $2 million to the Jacobs group for their proposal to build an aquarium in the powerhouse.

it was one of the projects he discussed on the sustainability / waterfront cruise last night.

When did the Jacobs project grow from 55,000 sq ft to 123,000?  and for the same price tag???

Hmm now rivaling the size of the one proposed by the aquarium group. 

 

I think Frank should be explaining why he supports this one as oppposed to the other one...

 

"Paul Ertel, general manager for Jacobs' Nautica Entertainment Complex, said that with the city's assistance, a 123,000-square-foot aquarium complex could open in the Powerhouse in the Flats next summer. The project cost is estimated at $9 million."

That price tag seems awfully low.

When did the Jacobs project grow from 55,000 sq ft to 123,000?   and for the same price tag???

Hmm now rivaling the size of the one proposed by the aquarium group.

 

I think Frank should be explaining why he supports this one as oppposed to the other one...

 

"Paul Ertel, general manager for Jacobs' Nautica Entertainment Complex, said that with the city's assistance, a 123,000-square-foot aquarium complex could open in the Powerhouse in the Flats next summer. The project cost is estimated at $9 million."

 

I was wondering the exact same thing. Same developers, same location, over twice the square footage? Not that I'm opposed, but how did this happen?

I attended the cruise last night...and did not hear that the square footage of Jacobs project had been increased. I would hate to think that the City would offer money to a group that already seems to have the cash.  The Aquarium group has the people set in place with the knowledge to build an Aquarium that would be a true attraction for the city....I am not sure what location they favor...but I wish they would surface in these discussions, and clear the confusion...

^ Yeah, I agree... Fund the real deal and something Cleveland will truly be proud of...  One is burgers and fries..the other is a classic 5 star plan in the works for years, and not a "poof!.... there you have your aquarium", thing. I personally do not like how this is being handled. Let's not be always so desperate for the quick fix just to say 'we have it' There is never enough time/money to do it right the first time...but always enough to do it over. Like Smokey said.. "Don't be sold on the very first one now....My Momma told me...you'd better shop around"

I attended the cruise last night...and did not hear that the square footage of Jacobs project had been increased. I would hate to think that the City would offer money to a group that already seems to have the cash.  The Aquarium group has the people set in place with the knowledge to build an Aquarium that would be a true attraction for the city....I am not sure what location they favor...but I wish they would surface in these discussions, and clear the confusion...

 

Well then Id think that would have been the perfect opportunity to ask Frank what the deal was with his offer for the Jacobs one as opposed to the other that as you said may be a better one.     

The forum was not presented with opportunites for questions or discussion...it was basically a presentation of projects proposed to the city, and activity with locations...

If I had a nickel....

 

Developer: New Flats Aquarium is a 'go'

Tom Beres    Updated: 9/10/2009 5:10:38 PM  Posted: 9/10/2009 4:44:37 PM

 

CLEVELAND -- There will be a new aquarium at Nautica in the Flats in summer of 2010.......

 

Some Aquarium boosters were hoping to build a bigger project on or near the lakefront but financing has not been identified.

 

Jackson says that's a worthy conversation, but calls this project one that is do-able and will have immediate benefits, creating jobs and economic development.....

 

(Full story - http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=121325

"Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson says the City of Cleveland will give the project a $2 million loan to complete its financing....Bill Patmon who is challenging Jackson in the November election says the city's $2 million would be better spent on restoring RTA's community circulator buses."

 

Discuss...

Well, SURE - except that by law, the city is not allowed to spend that money on anything other than business development loans.

Politics...

$2 million loan for aquarium on track to pass at tonight's Cleveland City Council meeting

By Henry J. Gomez, The Plain Dealer

September 28, 2009, 3:57PM

 

A $2 million loan to help build an indoor aquarium at the Nautica complex in the Flats appears to be headed for approval at tonight’s Cleveland City Council meeting.

 

 

MORE AT CLEVELAND.COM  http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2009/09/2_million_loan_for_jacobs_aqua.html

 

Oh this weeks story has the sq. footage back up to 123,000 sq ft.  It has been back and forth between 123,000 and 55,000 sq. ft., without any explanation.  (Im thinking for 9 mill it would have to be the 55,000 version with possibilities of future expansion, yet I have never seen this stated)

 

Does the PD not realize this?  HJG, how about some clarification?   

$$$ has been appoved.  Thanks HJG:

 

City council approves loan for aquarium on west bank

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Henry J. Gomez

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Cleveland's City Council gave a boost Monday to efforts to bring an indoor aquarium to the west bank of the Flats.

 

The council approved a $2 million loan for Nautica Aquarium LLC, a subsidiary of Jacobs Investments Inc. that plans to develop the project at its Powerhouse complex.

 

MORE AT CLEVELAND.COM: http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1254213068184630.xml&coll=2

 

Just to be clear, this is closer to a traditional aquarium like a small version of the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago rather than the Landry's restaurant "Aquarium", right?

 

 

http://www.aquariumrestaurants.com/flash_content/flash_content.html

 

nothing is like the shedd... nothing.

Oh this weeks story has the sq. footage back up to 123,000 sq ft. It has been back and forth between 123,000 and 55,000 sq. ft., without any explanation. (Im thinking for 9 mill it would have to be the 55,000 version with possibilities of future expansion, yet I have never seen this stated)

 

Does the PD not realize this? HJG, how about some clarification?

 

The presentation at the last City Planning Commission meeting showed the aquarium at 55,000 sqft, and was approved by the CPC.  I wonder where the PD is getting their numbers from as well; though a 125,000 sqft aquarium would be great, this is inaccurate information.

This was from June -

 

Jacobs intends to take one of the most iconic buildings in the City of Cleveland and the mid-west - the Historic Powerhouse - and create an aquarium complex that encompasses 123,000 sq. ft., including 55,000 sq. ft. of exhibit related space. "We are excited about bringing an aquarium with world-class features to the City of Cleveland," said Pat McKinley, Executive Vice-President for Jacobs

 

The site also has pictures, floor plans, as well as other data.

 

http://www.19actionnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=10606140

^That's what I suspected - the lower number represents that actual exhibit space (tanks), while the larger number represents the total size of the aquarium.  I assume that a large portion of the 55,000 will be consumed by the underwater tunnel exhibit... or whatever it is they call it.

 

I think this is a good size for us to start with.  It is not like their is not plenty of asphault to suck up down there if expansion is desired later on.

This was from June -

 

Jacobs intends to take one of the most iconic buildings in the City of Cleveland and the mid-west - the Historic Powerhouse - and create an aquarium complex that encompasses 123,000 sq. ft., including 55,000 sq. ft. of exhibit related space. "We are excited about bringing an aquarium with world-class features to the City of Cleveland," said Pat McKinley, Executive Vice-President for Jacobs

 

The site also has pictures, floor plans, as well as other data.

 

http://www.19actionnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=10606140

 

Thanks for that.  Thats the first time I have seen that explained.  I like how the PD randomly says one size and then the other without any expanation or regard to what they said before. 

$$$ has been appoved.  Thanks HJG:

 

City council approves loan for aquarium on west bank

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Henry J. Gomez

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Cleveland's City Council gave a boost Monday to efforts to bring an indoor aquarium to the west bank of the Flats.

 

The council approved a $2 million loan for Nautica Aquarium LLC, a subsidiary of Jacobs Investments Inc. that plans to develop the project at its Powerhouse complex.

 

MORE AT CLEVELAND.COM: http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1254213068184630.xml&coll=2

 

 

I was reading this article - and have seen this argument within the casino discussion as well - and I was hoping someone could help me understand this line of thought.

 

That being "jobs going to residents".  It mentions Zack Reed demanding residents be hired to work at the aquarium.  Who else would be hired?  Wouldn't working at the aquarium require you uto live in Cleveland?  And if you moved here from somewhere else to work at the aquarium, why is that at all a bad thing?

 

You're either hiring local residents or drawing population (with income) to the region.  How is either of these scenarios bad? 

He means "local residents that are eligible to vote for me".

 

City of Cleveland residents

I was reading this article - and have seen this argument within the casino discussion as well - and I was hoping someone could help me understand this line of thought.

 

That being "jobs going to residents". It mentions Zack Reed demanding residents be hired to work at the aquarium. Who else would be hired? Wouldn't working at the aquarium require you uto live in Cleveland? And if you moved here from somewhere else to work at the aquarium, why is that at all a bad thing?

 

You're either hiring local residents or drawing population (with income) to the region. How is either of these scenarios bad?

It means that not all the jobs can go to suburbanites commuting into the city.

This was from June -

 

Jacobs intends to take one of the most iconic buildings in the City of Cleveland and the mid-west - the Historic Powerhouse - and create an aquarium complex that encompasses 123,000 sq. ft., including 55,000 sq. ft. of exhibit related space. "We are excited about bringing an aquarium with world-class features to the City of Cleveland," said Pat McKinley, Executive Vice-President for Jacobs

 

The site also has pictures, floor plans, as well as other data.

 

http://www.19actionnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=10606140

 

Thanks for that.  Thats the first time I have seen that explained.  I like how the PD randomly says one size and then the other without any expanation or regard to what they said before. 

 

Sorry for the confusion. I meant the size of the actual facility, not the exhibit display. Thought that would be the best way to explain it ... I was filing stories from City Hall all day, on a wireless, and lacked the time and space to add all the context.

They were talking about this for the 5 minutes I listed to 98.5 this morning.  It seemed that it was mostly caller after caller saying they wouldn't feel safe letting their kids go to the powerhouse aquarium for a field trip, or they would never take their kids there because it is unsafe, etc.  The rest of the time was the hosts bashing the location.  Gotta love the suburban fear.