^Looks like we'll see some of those designs in a few weeks. From today's helpful Litt piece on Cleveland.com:

 

- Convention center hotel: Lawyer Jeffrey Appelbaum, who is representing the county as developer of the project, said the Atlanta architecture firm Cooper Carry will likely present schematic designs for the building to Cuyahoga County Council on Tuesday, Nov. 12.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2013/10/completion_of_global_center_fo.html#incart_river_default#incart_m-rpt-2

Also from Litt in the above article, this is not the first time he has indicated that the hotel will be 19+ floors. I wonder is that just his best guess or does he have some inside info. I'm hoping for about 24 floors with some type of mast or crown on top.

heres the latest cooper carry convention center hotel, a mariott marquis in wash, dc -- similiar to cleveland's needs:

 

http://www.lodgingmagazine.com/marriott-marquis-washington-dc-celebrates-topping-off/

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Marriott_Marquis

 

 

its nice, they do good hotel work, but its not a tower. not too worried about that tho, because i think the cleveland lot demands more of a tower style and of course dc famously does not allow towers.

 

 

 

 

From google maps at 200' - I'm hoping for a significant addition to the skyline *but* the Washington DC Marriott Marquis has almost 1,200 rooms and the footprint isn't that much larger than Cleveland's:

 

The parcel in Washington DC MayDay has shown above is 2.59 Acres.  The parcel in Cleveland is roughly 1.61 acres.  Good visual for comparison sake. 

 

One of the issues with Clevelands parcel that may allow for greater height is excavating for below grade parking will be difficult as was the case for the CC.  They may not want to deal with that, and jsut engineer for at grade to above grade.

The reason that Cleveland doesn't have skyscrapers I heard was that Cleveland has bedrock basically at street level and it makes it difficult to have towers rise to levels of key tower without astronomical additional cost involved.

^I think MayDay is going to have to give a skyscraper lesson once he reads that one.

The reason that Cleveland doesn't have skyscrapers I heard was that Cleveland has bedrock basically at street level and it makes it difficult to have towers rise to levels of key tower without astronomical additional cost involved.

 

Other way around. The bedrock is a stable foundation for buildings. In Cleveland, it is 200 feet below us requiring caissons to be dug down to bedrock for towers higher than 25 stories and thick concrete pads for lesser buildings. In New York City, it has bedrock at the surface which reduces the costs of building high rises.

nyc does not have bedrock near street level uniformly, so looking over the cityscape is a good example of seeing where you can easily build tall and where you cant (or where it would be expensive). thats also one reason why underground transit is so expensive to build too, bedrock is tough stuff.

 

another interesting factoid is that aboveground parking is illegal in nyc, since the 1980s i believe. cleveland thankfully has no such restriction, so hopefully they add parking and apts and get it up near the max height it can go. i know we are all more interested in good design here than height, but of course height would nice too!

 

 

 

heres the latest cooper carry convention center hotel, a mariott marquis in wash, dc -- similiar to cleveland's needs:

 

http://www.lodgingmagazine.com/marriott-marquis-washington-dc-celebrates-topping-off/

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Marriott_Marquis

 

 

its nice, they do good hotel work, but its not a tower. not too worried about that tho, because i think the cleveland lot demands more of a tower style and of course dc famously does not allow towers.

 

 

 

 

 

What exactly makes this "good"? You will never see the building from this perspective unless you are in a plane.

I was at the Westin Phoenix a few weeks ago and was thinking this is what I'd like to see in Cleveland.  Street level retail, a few stories of parking, 12 stories of hotel and some offices on top.  Except in Cleveland I'd rather have residential condos up there (with balconies). 

 

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2010_4th/Oct10_WestinPhoenix.html

 

 

I was at the Westin Phoenix a few weeks ago and was thinking this is what I'd like to see in Cleveland.  Street level retail, a few stories of parking, 12 stories of hotel and some offices on top.  Except in Cleveland I'd rather have residential condos up there (with balconies). 

 

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2010_4th/Oct10_WestinPhoenix.html

Except I think your going to need a lot more than 12 floors of hotels if you want a 600-650 hotel so that building would be pretty tall and I don't know if they are willing to go that high.

The reason that Cleveland doesn't have skyscrapers I heard was that Cleveland has bedrock basically at street level and it makes it difficult to have towers rise to levels of key tower without astronomical additional cost involved.

 

Other way around. The bedrock is a stable foundation for buildings. In Cleveland, it is 200 feet below us requiring caissons to be dug down to bedrock for towers higher than 25 stories and thick concrete pads for lesser buildings. In New York City, it has bedrock at the surface which reduces the costs of building high rises.

Ahh I think I just got the two mixed up because when I heard that they used NYC as a comparison. Thank you for the correction.

I was at the Westin Phoenix a few weeks ago and was thinking this is what I'd like to see in Cleveland.  Street level retail, a few stories of parking, 12 stories of hotel and some offices on top.  Except in Cleveland I'd rather have residential condos up there (with balconies). 

 

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2010_4th/Oct10_WestinPhoenix.html

Except I think your going to need a lot more than 12 floors of hotels if you want a 600-650 hotel so that building would be pretty tall and I don't know if they are willing to go that high.

 

Perhaps so.  I was basing on someone's assertion above that the site plan wasn't that much smaller than the DC hotel.  Large footprint at 12 hotel floors should yield a fairly sizable room total, no?

Keep in mind the building will not be edge to edge. The project area is about 2/3 of the available site according to an earlier county report.

 

The total area of the site is approximately 90,000 square feet with a 60,000-square-foot buildable area. Reportedly the site will be able to accommodate a high-rise tower of 20 floors or more.

 

Also the building will be in line with the Lakeside face of PublicHall and flush with the front of the MM. I'm guessing a building that will follow PH, BOE and the MM in size and shape, with a tower set back away from the mall towards Ontario for the hotel portion. Just a guess.

 

 

 

Perhaps so.  I was basing on someone's assertion above that the site plan wasn't that much smaller than the DC hotel.   Large footprint at 12 hotel floors should yield a fairly sizable room total, no?

 

I feel as if the rooms would be considerably smaller than D.C if the hotel were to be 12 floors. I feel as if an acre less is much more substantial than it may seem.

 

heres the latest cooper carry convention center hotel, a mariott marquis in wash, dc -- similiar to cleveland's needs:

 

http://www.lodgingmagazine.com/marriott-marquis-washington-dc-celebrates-topping-off/

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Marriott_Marquis

 

 

its nice, they do good hotel work, but its not a tower. not too worried about that tho, because i think the cleveland lot demands more of a tower style and of course dc famously does not allow towers.

 

 

 

 

 

What exactly makes this "good"? You will never see the building from this perspective unless you are in a plane.

 

 

 

i didnt say anything about that, i said they seem to do good work. have you seen cooper carrys work? when i looked at the website i saw they did the baltimore marriott and the lauderdale hilton foe example, where ive stated before and those are good hotels. also, they work with forest city and did the euclid ave master plan, so they know cleveland. that'll help. i hope the design fits cleveland as well as that newest hotel design fits right in with dc.

 

 

does anyone know why they are only developing 2/3 of the lot and it wont abut the med mart? is there some reason for that? seems like wasted space.

 

 

"does anyone know why they are only developing 2/3 of the lot and it wont abut the med mart? is there some reason for that? seems like wasted space."

 

So you don't block windows?

 

From the drawings, it looks like the setback facing city hall is related to the historic mall plan. They have lined up the front of the building so it matches the setback of the public auditorium. It will keep it uniform. Same with the setback from the mall itself, to keep it flush with the medical mart.

 

For the setback from the medical mart? I am imagining it comes from utilities (is there a driveway there?) and from a desire to not cover up the brand new wall they just built on that side. There are probably windows over there.

i didnt say anything about that, i said they seem to do good work. have you seen cooper carrys work? when i looked at the website i saw they did the baltimore marriott and the lauderdale hilton foe example, where ive stated before and those are good hotels. also, they work with forest city and did the euclid ave master plan, so they know cleveland. that'll help. i hope the design fits cleveland as well as that newest hotel design fits right in with dc.

 

does anyone know why they are only developing 2/3 of the lot and it wont abut the med mart? is there some reason for that? seems like wasted space.

 

 

Yes, I have seen their work on their website. It looks like the same crap found in "anybig city, USA".

I have no dobut that they may be one of the better firms in the country in terms of how a hotel operates and what makes them successful. I just hope they don't have any hand in the design.

 

Where did you see that they did the Euclid Ave. plan? Sasaki did that with Wilbur Smith Associates.

http://www.sasaki.com/project/105/

Has condos/apartments being part of this project actually been discussed or is it just an UO pipe dream? 

^Pretty sure it's the latter.

Where did you see that they did the Euclid Ave. plan? Sasaki did that with Wilbur Smith Associates.

http://www.sasaki.com/project/105/

 

Sasaki did the Euclid Corridor transit/streetscape project, but I think mrnyc was referring to some land use master planning Cooper Carry appears to have done for Euclid Ave stakeholders downtown: http://www.coopercarry.com/project/euclid-corridor-master-plan/

 

They also did the design work for the Cleveland HOB, it seems: http://www.coopercarry.com/project/house-of-blues/

Has condos/apartments being part of this project actually been discussed or is it just an UO pipe dream? 

 

pipe dream of multiple posters (along with retail)

 

pipe dream of multiple posters (along with retail)

 

Pipe dream in Cleveland (except at the Ameritrust and Schofield buildings). But a combined convention hotel/apartment building?

 

Sought in Seattle:

http://www.seattlepi.com/realestate/article/Developer-plans-Seattle-s-largest-convention-hotel-4393115.php

 

Needed in New Orleans:

http://thelensnola.org/2013/04/18/massive-riverfront-overhaul-would-use-convention-center-bonds-to-finance-private-developments/

 

Even in Evansville, IN:

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20130921/LOCAL/309219934

^The "pipe dream" isn't the concept of a mixed use tower, it's finding yet more public subsidy (on top of the $93M) to add some residential floors to this hotel.  Diverting money from, say, a public square redesign or mall improvements to add a couple floors of apartments to this tower would be a big mistake, IMHO.

^The "pipe dream" isn't the concept of a mixed use tower, it's finding yet more public subsidy (on top of the $93M) to add some residential floors to this hotel.  Diverting money from, say, a public square redesign or mall improvements to add a couple floors of apartments to this tower would be a big mistake, IMHO.

 

I disagree.  In a market where rents do not support new construction, why not boost the local economy in way other than convention dollars (a still-dying business by the way).  Extend the sin tax and start supporting neighborhoods, not just corporate interests.

^Oh, for sure, I agree with you--I'm against this Convention Center hotel for that very reason (I can think of lots of ways I'd prefer to spend $93M of completely discretionary subsidy).  But conditional on this hotel getting built, even if there were more public money available that could add residential floors to this project, I'd rather spend it on other things (including other residential projects).

Why would the county need to actively subsidize a residential or retail portion of the tower? You are essentially giving a development company free air rights and access to a crane and crew already on site. They pay the engineering and buildout over the hotel costs.

 

Am I oversimplyfing? That has to be cheaper for someone like Geis than having to secure your own site and handle the architect/engineering from scratch.

^If the residential can be added on top with no subsidy, then no complaints from me.  You're right that there would be major economies in the free site, staging and soft costs, plus probably in the hard costs too, due to shared foundation, etc.  I have no idea if that's enough to make up for the high marginal costs of building the top few floors that high (assuming that's where the residential is), a separate elevator bank, and maybe a separate entry.  It's a great question and would be awesome if the county at least asked it.

^If the residential can be added on top with no subsidy, then no complaints from me.  You're right that there would be major economies in the free site, staging and soft costs, plus probably in the hard costs too, due to shared foundation, etc.  I have no idea if that's enough to make up for the high marginal costs of building the top few floors that high (assuming that's where the residential is), a separate elevator bank, and maybe a separate entry.  It's a great question and would be awesome if the county at least asked it.

 

This is where I was going with this, so the taxpayer outlay would be minimal if the subsidy ended with the additional design.  The developer would pick up the tab for the additional labour, materials, and marketing.

I'll bet that with the base infrastructure already provided, a residential add-on might actually be financed by rents. If Ameritrust can command $2/sf rent, so should a building with a 360-degree view -- including a better view of the lakefront. I doubt it will actually happen, but I'd love to be surprised!

I guess we find out today which hotel brand this will be.  Just heard that on the news.. Is there any speculation?

Hilton emerges as likely operator of Cleveland's convention hotel, in deal with Cuyahoga County

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Add one more name -- a big one -- to the list of future hotel flags in downtown Cleveland.

 

Cuyahoga County officials have picked Hilton Worldwide as the likely operator of their planned convention center hotel, a $260 million project slated to replace the county's old administration building at Ontario Street and Lakeside Avenue.

 

Hilton executives will join County Executive Ed FitzGerald this morning at the new Cleveland Convention Center to announce their burgeoning relationship.

 

Details of the management agreement, which will outline Hilton's responsibilities and compensation, are still being worked out. And the transaction will require Cuyahoga County Council's approval. But the hotel company already is participating in discussions about the project, envisioned as a publicly owned and publicly financed hotel that will boost Cleveland's chances of landing large events.

 

"We had kind of a gaping hole in Cleveland, relative to our representation," said Ted Ratcliff, Hilton's senior vice president of operations for eastern North America. "We really didn't have a hotel in the city. Some of our brands are represented there, but not the Hilton flag in a significant downtown location."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2013/10/hilton_emerges_as_likely_opera.html#incart_river_default

Im pretty surprised its Hilton. I guess theyve changed their mind on their vow never to be in the city of Cleveland?

I'm not surprised. They were here in the begining of the year looking at another property. They've been interested in Cleveland

I'm very happy with this.  Great news.  Having a strong Marriott, Hilton, Kimpton, Intercontinental, Starwood, etc...is setting us up for success for future events.

A few Tweets from Michelle McFee earlier today because of Hilton deal:

 

"Construction expected to start by end of this year."

 

"Cleveland expects to lock in huge convention in 2018 with 7,200 room nights."

 

"Cleveland lost a 2015 event to Indy because we didn't have an attached hotel."

 

"People are ready to book conventions now that the Hilton deal has been announced."

 

Even the IX Center is getting some love.

"IX Center is finalist  for another huge show, which wouldn't happen without adding downtown Hilton"

 

Another Michelle tweet said 650 rooms, will break ground this year, will open in 2016.

A few Tweets from Michelle McFee earlier today because of Hilton deal:

 

"Cleveland expects to lock in huge convention in 2018 with 7,200 room nights."

 

 

There is not nearly that many rooms downtown...?

A room night joins both space and time, so there doesn't need to be. Room nights divided by days the convention is active equals a close enough number to the actual number of rooms occupied.

^If the residential can be added on top with no subsidy, then no complaints from me.  You're right that there would be major economies in the free site, staging and soft costs, plus probably in the hard costs too, due to shared foundation, etc.  I have no idea if that's enough to make up for the high marginal costs of building the top few floors that high (assuming that's where the residential is), a separate elevator bank, and maybe a separate entry.  It's a great question and would be awesome if the county at least asked it.

 

Here's what I wrote to my councilman:

 

I'm very excited that Hilton has been announced as the operator of the new convention center hotel downtown.  I'm wondering if there is an opportunity to have some residential floors included as part of the project.

 

As you know, downtown's residential vacancy rate is only 3-4%.  But relatively low rents make new residential construction challenging.  The convention hotel would give a residential developer an opportunity to create new apartments or condos downtown at a discounted rate because there will already be cranes in the air and construction going on. 

 

Hotel/residential combos are not uncommon, as you know from the tower currently under redevelopment next to the county's new headquarters.

 

I'd encourage council to at least explore the possibility of adding residential units to the convention center hotel to add even more 24/7 vitality (and tax dollars) to an already exciting project.

^let us know if you get a response.

 

Here's what I wrote to my councilman:

 

I'm very excited that Hilton has been announced as the operator of the new convention center hotel downtown.  I'm wondering if there is an opportunity to have some residential floors included as part of the project.

 

As you know, downtown's residential vacancy rate is only 3-4%.  But relatively low rents make new residential construction challenging.  The convention hotel would give a residential developer an opportunity to create new apartments or condos downtown at a discounted rate because there will already be cranes in the air and construction going on. 

 

Hotel/residential combos are not uncommon, as you know from the tower currently under redevelopment next to the county's new headquarters.

 

I'd encourage council to at least explore the possibility of adding residential units to the convention center hotel to add even more 24/7 vitality (and tax dollars) to an already exciting project.

 

I just Tweeted the same sort of idea to Ed FitzGerald. ;-)

isn't there already a residential tower right across from it? i know that it's a pretty notable one with multiple amenities and 24 hour security and notable residents like former commissioners... oh wait...

isn't there already a residential tower right across from it? i know that it's a pretty notable one with multiple amenities and 24 hour security and notable residents like former commissioners... oh wait...

 

Yeah, but the food stinks and the neighbors are downright felonious.

But I bet these places would sell/rent like hotcakes to lawyers!  It would be great to stumble over to a trial or pop home for a quick 2 martini lunch on recess!

Well, saw the rendering today for the Hotel. Don't know if it's final or close to final but in my humble opinion, it's legit. And tall. And will change the skyline. It's architecture we really haven't seen in Cle. Couldn't tell you how tall but it looks good. I'm sure some people will disagree if they saw it, but it's definitely more modern.

Well, saw the rendering today for the Hotel. Don't know if it's final or close to final but in my humble opinion, it's legit. And tall. And will change the skyline. It's architecture we really haven't seen in Cle. Couldn't tell you how tall but it looks good. I'm sure some people will disagree if they saw it, but it's definitely more modern.

 

And if you had to guess how tall based on the image you saw, i'm wondering if you might say it is just about as tall as the Breuer. ;)

Well, saw the rendering today for the Hotel. Don't know if it's final or close to final but in my humble opinion, it's legit. And tall. And will change the skyline. It's architecture we really haven't seen in Cle. Couldn't tell you how tall but it looks good. I'm sure some people will disagree if they saw it, but it's definitely more modern.

 

And if you had to guess how tall based on the image you saw, i'm wondering if you might say it is just about as tall as the Breuer. ;)

 

It's tough to say because the rendering had nothing else for perspective, but based on the "base" of the hotel, I assumed that was as tall as the medical mart (to keep in line with the group plan) and went from there. If I HAD to guess, I'd say 25-30 stories.

Well, saw the rendering today for the Hotel. Don't know if it's final or close to final but in my humble opinion, it's legit. And tall. And will change the skyline. It's architecture we really haven't seen in Cle. Couldn't tell you how tall but it looks good. I'm sure some people will disagree if they saw it, but it's definitely more modern.

 

Wow, incredible news thanks for sharing.