^If it had to be built behind Tower City I would hope that somehow, someway, the current convention center could be transformed into some type of production studio.  In my opinion, that would be one of the best uses of the site.

MyTwoSense, that's the major downside to building on the river... there wouldn't be room to expand unless they actually built the extension on the Scranton Peninsula.  We all know how eager Forest City is to do that.

Can someone help me understand the configuration of the current convention center complex?  Nothing on the web has helped me sort it out.  In the old building, I know there is the giant big auditorium with a flat floor, two horseshoe shaped seating tiers and a main stage.  What else is in the old building?

Just a verbal agreement so far...

 

County reaches verbal pact on medical mart

By JAY MILLER

March 13, 2008

 

There is a deal — at least a verbal one — for a medical mart in Cleveland.

 

Cuyahoga County commissioners heard Thursday from attorney Fred Nance, their chief negotiator, that Merchandise Mart Properties Inc. of Chicago has agreed in principal to invest $20 million to operate a medical mart that will be built here in conjunction with a new, publicly financed $400 million convention center.

 

The private investment was critical to the deal and was extracted from Merchandise Mart Properties only after the negotiations got down to the wire...

 

More at: http://www.crainscleveland.com

 

 

This is before the MM entered the picture but worth reposting.

 

MyTwoSense, that's the major downside to building on the river... there wouldn't be room to expand unless they actually built the extension on the Scranton Peninsula.  We all know how eager Forest City is to do that.

 

BINGO!  That is why I'm building at TC.  

 

If the current center is reused/rebuilt it can be expanded north and if need be the existing public hall can be used.   From the information I have (from the NBA finals) is that PH infrastructure (lighting, electricity, ADA, etc.) need to be upgraded but the building itself is in excellent condition.

I was wondering about that, actually. Would Public Hall be able to be used as a site for the medical mart?

 

Just curious. I don't remember how big it is.

I was wondering about that, actually. Would Public Hall be able to be used as a site for the medical mart?

 

Just curious. I don't remember how big it is.

 

The building can't be torn down or modified IIRC.

Does anyone have any "big picture" figures? (or knows where to find them?)

 

- total price tag for the CC & MM combined

- projected annual revenues

- projected economic activity likely to generate (vendors, hotels, etc.)

- time frame: when will they break ground? when will they open for business?

 

This should generate a bunch of additional activity downtown (I am thinking of projects such as Pesht): new hotels, entertainment, shopping areas, etc.

I was wondering about that, actually. Would Public Hall be able to be used as a site for the medical mart?

 

Just curious. I don't remember how big it is.

 

The building can't be torn down or modified IIRC.

 

 

You are correct - Local Historic Landmark Designation

regardless of future complications.. for right now this is EXCELLENT news!

 

congratulations cleveland.. lets make it work!

Great news for Cleveland!!  And I don't care what anyone says, we DESPERATELY need a large, modern, productive convention center downtown.

 

Also, Chicago is irrelevant to Cleveland re cc's.  McCormick Place is just beyond the edge of downtown because Chicago has no room for a building of that size.  Unlike Cleveland, their downtown doesn't need what a cc offers.  Plus, McCormick Place is for very large exhibitions.  But Chicago has so many super large hotels with large conference facilities attached, in some ways, a cc is somewhat superfluous for much of the non-boat show, car show type exhibitions.  In Cleveland, we've got number of small hotels w/ minimal facilities scattered around downtown.  It's been long known that we won't get a 500+ room hotel without a major convention center upgrade to attach to.

 

With this development we'll be adding quite a bit of construction to the scene in the next few years.

 

*Medical Mart (which I think is larger than 50,000 sf, I thought it was somewhere around 200,000) construction.

*Convention Center, regardless of where it goes.

*The above stated 500+ room hotel.

 

And hopefully this will make Stark's project more feasible from a retail and hotel standpoint.

I really wish this could be built on one of Starks lots and Stark develop the hotel for it.  I think that behind TC would just send alot of the travellers down to the new FEB.  With it on PS, I could see travellers catering moreso to Euclid Ave ner BRT, Tower City trains and mall, E4th, WHD.  I would like to see the CC, MM and hotel all surrounding PS versus hiding the center behind TC.

Medical Mart-Convention Center deal gets OK; could open in 3 years

Posted by Sarah Hollander

March 13, 2008 11:09AM

 

A new Medical Mart-Convention Center complex got a thumbs-up Thursday when Cuyahoga County announced a deal with a private partner in Chicago. The two sides expect to sign an official deal within a week.

 

If all goes smoothly, the complex could open in about three years, ending a decades-long struggle by civic and political leaders to replace the city's 85-year-old convention center.

 

The complex will be downtown. Merchandise Mart Properties Inc. will invest $20 million. And the county will cap the contribution from taxpayers...

 

more at: http://www.cleveland.com/medicalmart/

edit: looks like Blinker and I were posting the same thing at the same time.

Good! More good news! This is one of those things where I don't care about the details, just as long as it's going to happen, I'm happy! Add this one to the long list of projects that will transform Cleveland into what we all want it to become. Now, if we could start tackling the issue of new construction being built with "urban" and "dense" in mind, I think we'd be all set!

This is one of those things where I don't care about the details, just as long as it's going to happen, I'm happy! Add this one to the long list of projects that will transform Cleveland into what we all want it to become. Now, if we could start tackling the issue of new construction being built with "urban" and "dense" in mind, I think we'd be all set!

 

I care big time about the details. The details are where a project can turn to shit.

^i.e Browns stadium on the most valuable piece of preoperty in Cleveland proper (Used 8 times a year)...maybe even Cuyahoga County.

Who is this (presumably out-of-town) expert, why does the existing site selection committee not include planners, and what happened to the Convention Facilities Authority?

 

Local leaders to tap expert to help pick convention center site

Posted by Sarah Hollander

March 14, 2008 11:43AM

 

 

The Greater Cleveland Partnership plans to bring in a convention center expert to help Cuyahoga County pick a location for the planned Medical Mart-Convention Center complex.

 

An advisory group chosen by the partnership last August will also continue reviewing the possible sites. The partnership is the region's largest chamber of commerce...

 

more at: http://www.cleveland.com/medicalmart/

Who is this (presumably out-of-town) expert, why does the existing site selection committee not include planners, and what happened to the Convention Facilities Authority?

 

Hopefully more details are forthcoming. I have to say, it really amazes me sometimes how so much of the public's business ($38 million a year's worth in this case) is done behind closed doors in this town. How can there not be public hearings as part of the site selection process, held by a government body, not the chamber of commerce?

^i.e Browns stadium on the most valuable piece of preoperty in Cleveland proper (Used 8 times a year)...maybe even Cuyahoga County.

 

With all due respect, don't post inaccuracies.  We try not to do that here.  The stadium is used more than eight times a year.

 

It could have been built else where, but it is where it is and we need to stop harping on that fact.  In the same breath, we need to make sure that other projects do no become "white elephants" and further block access to the lakefront.

Proximity to hotels, restaurants, nightlife and transportation will be key factors, he said.

 

Geez, which site would that be??  :wink:

There isn't much space in front of Tower City for the Convention Center. You already have Sherwin Williams there. Personally, I think the Convention Center would be better somewhere else downtown because there is a lack of visibility in front of Tower City on the river.

Go to google satellite maps and look how little space you have in front of Tower City. There is the outdoor parking deck in front of it and then a surface lot on the river next to Sherwin Wiliams.

Too bad cleveland did not have a real mayor,who would take charge of his city.THe present day convention center  needed only 150 million dollars worth of upgrades,to make it viable.

 

 

 

I wonder who is going to file a federal law suit,on all the backroom dealings.

 

edisou, dear, with all due respect, can you post a clear message?  I have a difficult time understanding 99% of the messages you post.

 

Please post a link or hard fact information that states the current Cleveland convention center, only needs 150 million (in 2008 dollars) to be renovated.

person, that's not necessarily true - here are two screencaps for comparison:

 

Note the separate smaller red sites - those could be locations for hotels and are controlled by Forest City and could be connected via underground walkways, etc. I'm not saying a convention center would wrap around all the way to the Time-Warner "wedding tent", but that's all land controlled by Forest City. If they wanted to, they could be granted a variance of some kind to utilize Canal Road or build over it:

 

With the current site, it's much more centralized but it would also require more work underground with less 'enclosed' connectivity than Tower City.

 

Personally I prefer the current site because until I see renderings, I'm not convinced that the Tower City site could work aesthetically. Sure, they could plunk a structure down there but with something this mammoth and as inherently "un-urban" as convention centers are - the more you can conceal, the better, imho. I'm intrigued to see a detailed version of what they'd try to do at Tower City - maybe I'd change my tune.

^i.e Browns stadium on the most valuable piece of preoperty in Cleveland proper (Used 8 times a year)...maybe even Cuyahoga County.

 

With all due respect, don't post inaccuracies.  We try not to do that here.  The stadium is used more than eight times a year.

 

It could have been built else where, but it is where it is and we need to stop harping on that fact.  In the same breath, we need to make sure that other projects do no become "white elephants" and further block access to the lakefront.

 

MTS, I was trying to make a comparison as to why picking a good location is important to the project as a whole.  Sorry for mentioning the Browns Stadium in the wrong thread, but it was just used for the comparison.  Now, Back on topic, sorry mod's and admin's.

It is too bad that Sherwin Williams had to create a Beachwood type office setting with expanses of surface lots for such a small building.  That would free up more space obviously.  I'm torn on the location also.  The TC site is cramped but the proximity to public transportation is key.  People could hop on the BRT HealthLine right from TC to head to the hospitals.

Looking at your red shaded area on the first picture, I guess the Tower City site would require the outdoor parking deck between Canal Rd and Huron Rd to be removed. I was thinking the Convention Center would have to go between Canal Rd and the river because removing the deck would be quite the job and cause all sorts of parking disruptions.

 

Although the Tower City site is more connected, I would really like the convention center and the people that go with it to be visible in the city on street level. The Tower City site is too hidden and enclosed. Chances are, a visitor passing through downtown wouldn't be able to tell you if there was a convention or not.

 

Although the current Convention Center is "less connected", it is also more visible on a street level. Part of it does seem like its underground though from what I remember, I haven't spent a lot of time in that area. I would really like everything to be above ground in plain view of the city (sort of like the one in Pittsburgh).

Just curious, does Sherwin Williams occupy all that building space between W 2nd and Ontario on your map?

^I don't believe so - they occupy a substantial amount of space in the Landmark Office Towers but not *all* of it. And if you're thinking of relocating their research facilities into the Landmark building - not a chance.

Not only does Sherwin Williams occupy the majority of space they own the complex.  After SOHIO left, SOHIO only had one lease that was 4/5 floor for the credit card division.  Everything else went back to Landmark (ie Sherwin Williams).

 

if they build the new cc at tc (as it seems they will now) i hope the county at least tries to bring scranton redevelopment back up during negotiations. not holding my breath or anything.

IIRC, Sherwin was there before the terminal tower was built, and it was thier original building.  If the Van Swerigans (?sp) could not get the land from them, I doubt the Ratners can.

I think convention centers are actually street-killers, so I don't really mind if the thing is tucked into the valley behind TC as long as it can be designed in a way that doesn't destroy the views from the valley, Scranton Peninsula and the West Side.  Sounds like that might be tough though.  Connecting it to Tower City would also make a facility a little more appealing during Cleveland's winter months...

From Steven Litt's Blog.  Article with pic's here:  http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2008/03/_now_finally_its_time.html

 

Medical Mart and Convention Center site selection process should involve the public

Posted by Steven Litt/Plain Dealer Architecture Critic

March 14, 2008 13:42PM

 

 

Now, finally, it's time to pick a site.

 

The announcement Thursday that Cuyahoga County had reached agreement with a private developer on a new Medical Mart and convention center raises the huge question of where to put the facilities.

 

One thing is clear now: There are no plans for public involvement early in the process, even though choosing a site is one of the biggest city planning issues facing the city...

 

 

re MayDay's comments:  - I don't see the Mall as more "central" than Tower City, but less, esp in terms of Public Square, the traffic and transit hub.  Also, (as w/ Steve Litt, too)

 

Looks?  While I don’t want some hideous structure built, I'm less worried how the new Tower City location "looks" because the proposed location is TC's backside which, now, is quite ugly -- exposed girders and the like.  Conv Centers, by nature, aren’t built for beauty and, most often, cities stick them to the side of prime RE (mixed use) people areas since, when not in use, cc’s are essentially huge boxes.  TC faces both Public Square (and Prospect) and faces away from Huron Rd and the River.  The beautiful Terminal Tower/Higbees/Renaissance Hotel entrance is what most people, entering the complex will still see.  (someone above noted the ‘problem’ of a non/less visible CC at Tower City – but remember, the current CC is underground/out of sight and, unless you’re a local, you don’t know what Public Hall is or that it’s tied to the complex).

 

Limited Size of Tower City site?  I don’t see that as a problem.  The footprint is large enough, esp, as noted, if you expand into existing structures; wonder if MK Ferguson (the huge old P.O. location) and the State Offices could be relocated and their buildings retrofitted for extra conv space?

 

Spinoff?  Tower City has MUCH greater potential.  MM at Tower City can (finally) grow to link, into 1 neighborhood, E. 4th Gateway, Tower City and the Warehouse Dist.  As someone noted, earlier, the excitement/synergy of the Tower City site could (finally) jump start Pesht.   ... whereas the Mall site (even accounting for taking down the current county buildings and expanding in that direction) doesn't really link to any neighborhood except North Coast and, maybe, Erieview/Galleria/Ave District.  The Mall location is effectively blocked from the Warehouse Dist by the huge Justice Center complex and, more than likely, would be yet another downtown "island". 

 

Transit?  While Steve Litt, in his article and blog re TC (it's pretty obvious he, like most UOers prefers he Mall) mentions the Rapid hub, but doesn't stress, in particular, the direct Airport Rapid connection with a direct, 1-seat 25 min, indoor ride to the new convention complex.  A huge advantage for conventioneers?  ah,... is last weekend's blizzard just a fuzzy memory?   And ECP starts/terminates right at TC for a direct feed into the Clinic or UH, the latter being accessible via the current Red Line to U.Circle.

 

MayDay did note TC's existing (better) connectivity.  The direct indoor connection to the Q also boosts the TC site, as well.

 

In fairness to the Mall, one thing MayDay’s red-area map didn’t note is the potential expansion over the railroad/RTA tracks and, possibly, the Shoreway, depending on what becomes of it (perhaps lowered or tunneled) in its future lakefront boulevard configuration. 

 

Existing Infrastructure?  Yes, beautiful Public Hall exists as do the foundations w/ the current underground complex (although one article noted weak soil considerations could be problematic).  However, Tower City already has the shopping mall, 2 luxury hotels and a number of high-end restaurants and the Q existing RIGHT NOW. 

 

 

Using Public Hall?  I love this building, too.  But I don’t believe it has become a white elephant (Litt’s words).  The studio stage/sound stage idea seems workable.  Plus I would tie Music Hall and the Auditorium more into the Rock Hall, esp since we’re finally getting R&RHOF inductions back, albeit in rotations.  I just can’t see this building going to waste, but it is in dire need of fixing up.

 

"I don't see the Mall as more "central" than Tower City, but less, esp in terms of Public Square, the traffic and transit hub."

 

What I meant by centralized is that the available land at the Mall site is less "stretched out" than at Tower City. I wasn't referring to its location downtown or proximity to transit, etc., more the "shape" of the site if that makes sense. I'm just saying that if the CC were to be built at TC, they'll want to invest in those golf-cart trams they have at the airport in case someone needs to go from the furthest point west to the furthest point east. 

 

"MayDay’s red-area map didn’t note is the potential expansion over the railroad/RTA tracks"

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but federal law prevents that from happening.

If you're curious, this is what the convention center in Las Vegas looks like. From what I hear, this is where people really love having conventions.

 

That's my big concern. How are they going to fill a convention center here?

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?client=firefox-a&channel=s&hl=en&ie=UTF8&dq=CONVENTION+CENTER+loc:+Las+Vegas,+NV&daddr=850+Las+Vegas+Blvd+N,+Las+Vegas,+NV+89101&geocode=7792969973190313507,36.179069,-115.134842&f=d&ll=36.179757,-115.129434&spn=0.003828,0.010042&t=h&z=17

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but federal law prevents that from happening.

 

I've never heard that, but it very well may be true (but isn't Chicago's McCormick Place built over the old IC/Metra Electric commuter rail tracks?)  Perhaps KJP has some insight on this.

JamieC, that not the convention center.  Also, what concerns do you have about bookings?  There are several bookings at the current Cleveland convention center and many large scale bookings at the IX, the new center would assume bookings by both as the IX will go away and then there are the 50 additional reoccurring events that will be booked.

 

I think McCormick place was grand fathered.  I thought I read that the case can be made for Cleveland's "extension" as well, since it would be tying in an existing rail station.  If it was a complete new build it would be a no-go.

Regarding Litt's latest blog entry:  The guy is usually pretty well-reasoned, but this article was weak. I can understand why he wants the CC to be located at the current site, but he uses some pretty flawed reasoning to back up his point. Does he really want future CC expansions to occur on lakefront property??

 

 

Well, wasn't the "Lakefront Option" of the current CC site stretching the Convention Center over the tracks and or Shoreway, with the Mall stretching along over the top?

The idea of expanding north onto lakefront property struck me as a little bit off too.  I am far from an expert in this area, but it seems to me that I might find myself asking if this is the best use of such prime land if at some point in the future the convention center began to expand more towards the lake.  I'm glad to see that I am not the only one considering this aspect of the proposal. 

^Yet another reason why Tower City's the better site.

Well, wasn't the "Lakefront Option" of the current CC site stretching the Convention Center over the tracks and or Shoreway, with the Mall stretching along over the top?

 

Yes

 

^Yet another reason why Tower City's the better site.

I disagree neighbor.  Having the center attatched to Tower City only helps one group.  Tower City.  Not Cleveland as a whole.

"I disagree neighbor.  Having the center attatched to Tower City only helps one group.  Tower City.  Not Cleveland as a whole."

 

I could see how you would think this.. but I think its going to immensely benefit the whole city. I mean, sure you would have a lot of people eating lunch in tower city and spending a lot of time/money there.. but if your here on business do you think they want to stay inside of one huge complex? NO they want convenience, but im sure they will want to explore just a little bit. I mean yeah TC will develop a lot of tourist shops (hopefully mainly booths), but the stores inside of it should improve in quality.. something that really would put a great impression on visitors.

 

In my mind sure they might eat breakfast at their hotel (WHD/pesht? or Central bus. dist), WALK through the streets to the convention center, MAYBE stay there for lunch.. maybe use the trolley or get away from the convention by going outside, etc. Plus after they are done with business what do they do for dinner? hopefully either have a dinner planned with a client or something (in that case a local rest.).. or they go out with their colleagues (or themself?) and when they do, they arent going to want to go BACK to the CC/TC complex are they? i surely wouldnt.. i would want something walkable and good: a nice city restaurant.

 

I guess in my opinion it WILL help the whole city because it will vastly improve our "keystone" building, or our main transportation hub and skyscraper. TC needs help, and I think adding the MM/CC will benefit the city greatly by not only improving TC as a whole, but giving many parts of downtown a flourish of activity. People look at a shitty TC and think, wow this city is really crappy if we call THIS our best attraction/activity place (or at least one of them). so improving it will give out of towners AND locals great thoughts about the cleve.

A number of recent posts have talked about TC as the transportation hub. What about the future? Ohio Hub, commuter rail, Amtrak? I'm not going to pretend to be the expert on this (he's over in GB) but FCE has basically turned their back on growing TC as a transportation hub. They built an office tower over top of the old western approach tracks.

 

I'm trying to keep an open mind about these two sites but as attractive as TC is today as the transportation hub for RTA, if a new convention center at the existing location could facilitate bridging the tracks below mall C and include a major intercity rail station (one seat trip to Columbus or Chicago or Pittsburgh - leaving during the day!) that would tend to make me favor the current site. The RTA waterfront line would connect the two stations and provide nice linkage for visitors to FEB and TC amenities.

 

None of this would really impinge on lakefront development, just bridge tracks and roadway between mall C and Browns stadium that aren't going anywhere. Then, to keep dreaming -- put a roof on Browns Stadium with a direct connection to the rail hub and the new convention center.

Don't forget the IX Center. It won't just go away...and look at the size of the IX Center and compare it to the size of the proposed new Cleveland Convention Center. Maybe this has all changed. See this from 2005:

 

I-X Center boss nixes closure talk

By JAY MILLER

July 04, 2005 6:01AM

 

The I-X Center lives. And its operator and users aren't going to abandon it quietly to ease the way for a new downtown convention center.

 

Asked if he would relinquish his lease if a new, large convention center were built downtown, Ray Park, whose Park Corp. leases the mammoth I-X Center from the city of Cleveland, was brief and clear: "Absolutely not, under no circumstances," Mr. Park said. "The I-X Center is a going concern."

 

The Convention Facilities Authority (CFA), the quasi-public agency created last year to make decisions about how to improve Cleveland's convention facilities, has been grappling with options for a new convention center on the site of the 45-year-old Cleveland Convention Center on the Mall.

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers, which recently completed a study of the local convention and trade show market for the CFA, recommended the community build a center with a 300,000-square-foot exhibit hall, slightly bigger than the current hall, which offers 278,000 square feet of space. That would bring a new center's occupancy rate up to an acceptable level and maximize the impact on downtown. Last Friday, the CFA's planning committee voted to recommend that the CFA set a goal of building a 300,000-square-foot center. However, it also recommended that the CFA not disturb the I-X Center lease, which runs until 2014...

 

more at: http://www.crainscleveland.com