regardless if the convention center stays at the Mall or moves to TC, we need to invest around the malls.  Whether they're surrounded by hotel, residential, or office towers, we need to inject that area with sustained activity.  Maybe the new aquarium as an attraction?  KJP, hasn't the idea of making Public Auditorium a new intermodal station been tossed around or did I dream that? 

 

The malls are quite gorgeous!  Even now there's the fountain and art installation which add to the character of the mall.  This-along with many other areas in Cleveland (Public Square, waterfronts, etc...) deserve the attention of the world's most pretigious and exciting landscape architecture/urban design firms.

 

While I'd love to see the CC stay where it is, I hope we don't give up on the malls as this may prove to be an opportunity where we can create a new destination in Cleveland.  Then, after subsequential development, all of our green spaces may actually mean something and serve as a necessity to maintaining a high quality of life for visitors and residents of downtown.

MTS, that's great that it's one huge ass park, but what does that do for Cleveland? Goto Lakewood Park and find swings, pools, a performance stage, a skatepark, a pier, and so on, people of all ages enjoying themselves for an entire afternoon. Goto Central Park and find breakdancers, a skate rink, full grown trees, joggers, sunbathers, bike rentals, horse rides and get lost in the park for an entire day. Goto Mall B and be bored in 5 minutes. I walk, ride, and jog in downtown all the time and I never want to hang out in the Mall area. Either a homeless person will ask me for money or I will simply be bored because nothing is ever going on. I'd rather see more public events (the outdoor movie thing is a start), I'd also like to see better crossing options (Coventry in C. Hts. knows how it's done), I'd like more trees, more rocks, public restrooms, underground walkways leading to the Arcade and Tower City and NOT to a parking garage, I'd like outdoor festivals all year round and not just in July and August, I'd like to see public art on display, art festivals, anything. Maybe then I'd defend Mall A, B, and C. Maybe move the Free Stamp to Mall B and tear down Willow Park. As for the Mall closest to City Hall and the overlook near Browns Stadium, put some binoculars out, build real overlook viewing area, connect the Mall something other than parking garages. As for the Federal Building's new plaza's full of trees. I would rather have seen some sort of mixed-used project offering retail on a ground or underground level topped with green space. It's not going to be utilized other than M-F 9-5 - a great smoking pit for employees who will have no need to leave their "job site" now.

 

If we accept everything as it is, this city will never grow or be better.  I want more. I demand more. And you should too. The parking lots suck, the Malls need to be utilized better, and so forth. If we constantly defend bad ideas because it's the only idea, then we lose in the long run. Many of those people with ideas and demands get sick of being shot down and they leave to go somewhere their ideas are more accepted. I am not exactly too happy with the fact that the Convention Center is being steered by $ and the Tower City location was a given a year ago, so Nance doesn't need to tell us, because we already knew how this would pan out. Again - who cares what would work or look good - let's just steer the future with a few powerful players. I'm damn sure if the Convention Center WAS built near the Malls, they would finally be utilized properly.

Um, what part of "discussion about parks is OFF-TOPIC" don't you people understand?!?

KJP, hasn't the idea of making Public Auditorium a new intermodal station been tossed around or did I dream that?

 

You're close. Part of the convention center plan was to extend the mall over the tracks. Sandwiched between the tracks and the mall would be the intermodal station. I'll have to post a rendering sometime (though you can probably find past postings of it somewhere on here).

i'll leave the downtown parks discussion alone, but it would make for an excellent topic.  As it relates to this topic... It was reason 8,793 that the current site is better than the TC one.  This was the best chance we had to reinvigorate this area of downtown.  I'd have loved to have seen the hotels, restaurants, and other ancillary businesses pop up around the malls bringing that area to life.  A convention center here would have connected the CBD to the warehouse, civic districts, and the lakefront THROUGH the malls.  Now, if they indeed build the CC behind tower city we've got a HUGE problem.  You've got a ton of prime space in the middle of downtown that is going to be deader than it already is.  And there are no large scale developments out there that fit the footprint of an old abandoned CC.  I mean how many people need to be at a film production studio?  Certainly not enough to add any sort of life to the area... ugh.

Start one in City Discussion.

 

Back to the CC/MM.......

i'll leave the downtown parks discussion alone, but it would make for an excellent topic.  As it relates to this topic... It was reason 8,793 that the current site is better than the TC one.  This was the best chance we had to reinvigorate this area of downtown.  I'd have loved to have seen the hotels, restaurants, and other ancillary businesses pop up around the malls bringing that area to life.  A convention center here would have connected the CBD to the warehouse, civic districts, and the lakefront THROUGH the malls.  Now, if they indeed build the CC behind tower city we've got a HUGE problem.  You've got a ton of prime space in the middle of downtown that is going to be deader than it already is.  And there are no large scale developments out there that fit the footprint of an old abandoned CC.  I mean how many people need to be at a film production studio?  Certainly not enough to add any sort of life to the area... ugh.

 

Bingo!  I could not have said this better myself.

I know the rendering you're talking about.  How ironic would it be that after 3/4 century, the Group Plan would finally have the train station it intended to have from the start!?

i'll leave the downtown parks discussion alone, but it would make for an excellent topic.  As it relates to this topic... It was reason 8,793 that the current site is better than the TC one.  This was the best chance we had to reinvigorate this area of downtown.  I'd have loved to have seen the hotels, restaurants, and other ancillary businesses pop up around the malls bringing that area to life.  A convention center here would have connected the CBD to the warehouse, civic districts, and the lakefront THROUGH the malls.  Now, if they indeed build the CC behind tower city we've got a HUGE problem.  You've got a ton of prime space in the middle of downtown that is going to be deader than it already is.  And there are no large scale developments out there that fit the footprint of an old abandoned CC.  I mean how many people need to be at a film production studio?  Certainly not enough to add any sort of life to the area... ugh.

 

Exactly.  Thats what bothers me most is the idea of the wholesale abondonment that would happen, in regard to the current space and buildings associated with it as well as the missed (golden) opportunity of adding to this and the surrounding area (adding to the magnificent assets that are currently there) and giving everything a renewed sense of life and purpose.  That alone you cant put a price tag on!  Its like the county (and city) has failed to embrace these things. 

Ditto on the production studio.   

i somehow doubt they are adding this to their "costs"... and it's absurd if they're not.  Why is no one speaking of the "cost" of the future development that is going to have to occurr to revive the ghost town the old convention center will become.

 

Edit:  By the way I'd love to hear why there is a cap to this project.  So it's OK to tax us for 400 million... but not 500?  would anyone really notice or give a crap if the tax were extended 2 years?  Isn't it a tad bit more important to get the location right given the magnitude of the decision than worry about an extra year or two of a .25 cent tax?

BTW, did anybody go to Bar Cento to corner Peter Lawson Jones about these issues? (July 31, they had a happy hour with him, giving the opportunity "share what's on your mind" )

 

 

Politically, no.  People won't realize what a mistake the TC site is till after the next election.  But the political damage from extending the sales tax will be felt immediately.

An excellent question! Here's a shorter way of wording it....

 

What is the cost of preparing the existing convention center site for a new use and will that cost be part of building the convention center at Tower City?

^that's why you're a journalist and I'm a project manager.

"Isn't it a tad bit more important to get the location right given the magnitude of the decision than worry about an extra year or two of a .25 cent tax?"

 

To the cheap b@stards majority of Cuyahoga County residents? Are you REALLY asking that question?

Very good question, indeed.

 

Now, how can this be voiced publically??

Yes, re-use of the old center should be part of the equation but of course it won't. Instead FCE or Jacobs will by the old site for a few mil (using a brownfield loan from the county) and then after leaving it undeveloped for a decade or so, will sell it back to the county for 10x what they originally paid.

 

Just another prediction, could be off by a million here or there but who really cares  :-D :-D :-D

"Isn't it a tad bit more important to get the location right given the magnitude of the decision than worry about an extra year or two of a .25 cent tax?"

 

To the cheap b@stards majority of Cuyahoga County residents? Are you REALLY asking that question?

 

:oops: sigh.

 

is it really so much to ask for once that we make the best decision for the long term benefit of our city, instead of the cheapest alternative?!?  And yes... you're right... and I already no the answer to that question.  But that won't keep me from harping in the ear of every person i can get to listen.

BTW, did anybody go to Bar Cento to corner Peter Lawson Jones about these issues? (July 31, they had a happy hour with him, giving the opportunity "share what's on your mind" )

 

Ok well maybe at least a well writen op-ed piece?

i somehow doubt they are adding this to their "costs"... and it's absurd if they're not. Why is no one speaking of the "cost" of the future development that is going to have to occurr to revive the ghost town the old convention center will become.

 

Edit: By the way I'd love to hear why there is a cap to this project. So it's OK to tax us for 400 million... but not 500? would anyone really notice or give a crap if the tax were extended 2 years? Isn't it a tad bit more important to get the location right given the magnitude of the decision than worry about an extra year or two of a .25 cent tax?

 

I agree. PLJ made such a huge stink about not exceeding $400m. Maybe he'd be a little more reasonable and less sound bite-ish about things if this weren't an election year.

For someone that's been 99.99% sure that the facility was going to be jammed behind TC for about 4 years now... this is actually becoming even more depressing the closer it gets to reality.  Let's call this thing what it is... It's not a convention center, it's a vertically oriented medical mart facility.  If you can't have regular conventions in it (think about it... could you ever have the car show or something like the fabulous food show... or a republican or democratic convention in a multileveled elevator shaft driven space that breaks people up into segmented floors? No.)... the public shouldn't be paying for it.  There I said it.

Once again, the cost of buying the site behind TC, either w/ air rights or an actual purchase by the county, has been left out of the equation.  The cost of the purchase should DEFINITELY be taken into account.  Remember when developer Scaravelli (sp?) wanted to buy Forest City's land in the Scranton Penninsula, directly across the river from the proposed convention center for $50 Million?  That was a no go.

I believe the reason they are trying to stick so closely to the $400 million mark is anything above the $400 million mark has to be absorbed by MMPI. I'd imagine, if I were MMPI, I could understand catching $20 to $30 million in overruns, but $100 million+ would make me think twice about the feasibility of the project. This is why they want to get the cost down as close to the $400 million mark as possible.

 

Do I agree with that? Not really. Adding a few years onto this tax would be OK with me to get it done right. I want an A+, not a B when the doors open

 

Do I agree with that? Not really. Adding a few years onto this tax would be OK with me to get it done right. I want an A+, not a B when the doors open

 

I'd be thrilled with a B+

a B+ is not possible at the TC site.

a B+ is not possible at the TC site.

 

that site is only capable of a "F".  "F" standing for "F-ing Ridiculous"!

a B+ is not possible at the TC site.

 

that site is only capable of a "F".  "F" standing for "F-king Ridiculous"!

 

Can you please watch your language, at least change it F-ing for future reference? This about the third post in the last two days from you.

 

If you must ask: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_filtering

It really is only capabable of an F.  Because:

 

A. You can't put a real convention center behind tower city.

B. You abandon a ton of space in a prime part of town that becomes utterly useless and damages city development for at least 50 years.

I will never understand why they want to put a convention center with views of the gritty and polluted industrial valley into a city that's trying to not be stereotyped as a dying industrial rust-belt town... squeezing it between TC and the river so severely limits any potential spin-off development (conveniently limited mostly to Forest City owned property for additional hotel space) or options for expanded nightlife/restaurants/shopping.  Access to the whole of downtown is blocked by the monolithic Tower City complex and the unattractive back-side of the Landmark Towers complete with loading docks.  This decision is just stupid.

On the bright side, this will probably be a well-needed boost to Tower City, right?

Are we ever going to catch a break? Think about it, we have a company from outside the region that wants to place a medical mart in our city, and we can't figure out where to put it. I'm trying to be optimistic, but it's hard. It's obvious Forest City has its hands all over this project. Maybe something good will come out of this. A medical mart is better than no medical mart, right?

Are we ever going to catch a break? Think about it, we have a company from outside the region that wants to place a medical mart in our city, and we can't figure out where to put it. I'm trying to be optimistic, but it's hard. It's obvious Forest City has its hands all over this project. Maybe something good will come out of this. A medical mart is better than no medical mart, right?

 

That's like a person that says "At least I have a husband/wife/significant other even if he/she beats me".

 

The point we're all trying to make is.  LETS DO THIS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

 

• Cost are a issue, but if it cost a little more to get a better facility, then do it.
  
• Location.  Why build an inferior facility, which, from what we've seen so far, cannot accomodate THE NEEDS of a major trade show.  Nor will be a catalyst for spin off development, such as a) adding a more diverse group of hotels b) eliminating the IX center - which doesn't have any support and expanding the airport or adding a more diverse group of hotels if built at the current site.
  
• Nor will be a catalyst for spin off development, such as a) adding a more diverse group of hotels, restaurants or auxilary services  b) eliminating the IX center - which doesn't have any support and which would still be needed to host large events yet have not "reach". c) because the IX will need to remain open to support large event or they will avoid the region al together, Hopkins will not be able to expand.

 

The negative outway any positive building at TC brings.

AND....

            ....  since it appears the CC will be built behind TC, I suggest adding this to the "Idiotic Construction" thread!  There I said it!  :roll:

^"Maybe something good will come out of this. A medical mart is better than no medical mart, right?"

Yes I suppose your right sir2gees but it just doesn't feel right does it?   

Is this now a forgone conclusion that the TC site is it without considering the actual cost of acquiring the land/air rights and redevelopment of the old CC? 

My Two Sense -

 

I totally agree the TC location is a poor location. I was just trying to be positive!

^"Maybe something good will come out of this. A medical mart is better than no medical mart, right?"

Yes I suppose your right sir2gees but it just doesn't feel right does it?

Is this now a forgone conclusion that the TC site is it without considering the actual cost of acquiring the land/air rights and redevelopment of the old CC?

 

The air rights no longer have to be acquired because of FCE's amended proposal.

 

Why is ground water all of a sudden an issue? Did they not know this stuff a few years back 2003,2004? when they were comparing the sites?

 

 

 

Yes, they did. The CFA had discussed it many times.

I still think the ground water thing is crapola since you can easily use gravity as you dig towards the lake to clear the water out.  Unless there's SOOO much water that you are in Lake Erie which I have a hard time believing, this should be pretty doable and a non-issue unless your name is FC and you don't own that property. :whip:  FC cry me a river apparently under the CC..  Is the CC sinking?  I don't think so....

I still think the ground water thing is crapola since you can easily use gravity as you dig towards the lake to clear the water out.   Unless there's SOOO much water that you are in Lake Erie which I have a hard time believing, this should be pretty doable and a non-issue unless your name is FC and you don't own that property. :whip: FC cry me a river apparently under the CC.. Is the CC sinking? I don't think so....

 

GoTribe, what does an engineer say about groundwater issues?

Who is the panel making the recommendation, and who makes the final decision?  Isn't it the GCP and County Commissioners?

I still think the ground water thing is crapola since you can easily use gravity as you dig towards the lake to clear the water out. Unless there's SOOO much water that you are in Lake Erie which I have a hard time believing, this should be pretty doable and a non-issue unless your name is FC and you don't own that property. :whip: FC cry me a river apparently under the CC.. Is the CC sinking? I don't think so....

 

GoTribe, what does an engineer say about groundwater issues?

 

Groundwater issues are not a problem if you have the money to build the structure.  If this were to be an office building rising out of a matt foundation with a relatively small surface area, then cost would not be much of an issue (although it could probably be built cheaper in Strongsville minus consideration of land value).  Given the large surface area of the convention center, groundwater would be a costly expense.  Drilling in the downtown area shows obviously, there is alot of groundwater present and it does add economic hardship to any project downtown.  I could imagine with the scale of this project that it would significantly affect the cost.  The fascinating thing about downtown (I guess if your and engineer or geologist) is how sharply the geology of the groundwater table is elevated up and decreased in width as you move south.  More spoecifically, as one would find drilling around the southside of TC or Jacobs field, there is a significanyly less amount of groundwater present then there would be along the NS tracks.  This occurs all along the lake out to Avon Lake.  Ground water by the power plant in Avon Lake is much more significant than it is inland a mile. 

 

So, in short, from an engineers point of view that blocks out any political bias in design, I would agree with the fact that it would be more costly to construct near the current site.  In design, one could possibly divert the groundwater encounterred behind TC to the river when preparing the foundation system.  It is right next to the site.  Does this site serve as an econmic engine for the city.  Well, that is left for the planners and architects whose job it is to incorporate the best possible asthetics and design that infuses life to the surrounding area.  I do believe an experienced architect can most definately make TC site a shot in the arm for the city. 

Here's to hoping an international competition is assembled for this project, but I don't have much faith in this seeing what was acceptable to the county for the county offices for the Breuer site.

And here we go

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/plaindealer/2008/08/tower_city_site_appears_to_be.html

 

 

Tower City site appears to be top convention center choice

Posted by Sarah Hollander

August 06, 2008 08:15AM

 

Business leaders appear to be cobbling together alternative financing to help make a new riverfront convention center and medical mart possible.

 

 

Previous medical mart/convention center coverageThe Greater Cleveland Partnership, the region's largest chamber of commerce, expects to recommend a location to Cuyahoga County commissioners Thursday.

Commissioner Tim Hagan said he has heard that the partnership's site selection committee favors a riverfront center behind Tower City. This option appears to be much cheaper than the other top contender -- a renovation and expansion at the current Lakeside Avenue location...

 

 

I'm going to play devil's advocate.  I think that if they have a cheaper site that that is what they have to go with.  At this point, with the fiasco in county govt., and the tax being as unpopular as it is, if they have to really stretch the tax to a higher amount or double it's length people are going to go nuts and there could be a good chance the project doesn't happen.

 

Also this is a real opportunity for the designer of this project.  I know that in terms of the site it is going to be hard to get a functionally perfect CC, but some of the most ingenious and architecturally stimulating projects come from difficult sites.  I'm the last to say let's wait and see what the plans are and than judge it than, but maybe this could turn out better than we could expect. 

There is by no means TC has to be a bad choice for the site.  There are so many ways to incorporate the Convention Center and MM into this spot to create an economic boom and a vibrant district.  Any good architect can make this happen.  The city and county should let them do their work and trust that they do a good job.  The city on the other hand needs to work the hardest at finding an alternative use for the current site.  That should be the most important thing on their minds at this time.  TC is a good choice from an economic standpoint and could very easily provide a beautiful location for the new center for ease of travel, amenities and nightlife. 

If the Tower City location is $60 million to $100 million over budget, and that's the cheaper of the two, then I think it's time to forget about a convention center. I wasn't a big fan of it in the first place. But at that price, I'm not a fan of it at all.

 

Refund the money or use it to clean up environmentally compromised, former industrial properties in the county.

There is by no means TC has to be a bad choice for the site.  There are so many ways to incorporate the Convention Center and MM into this spot to create an economic boom and a vibrant district.  Any good architect can make this happen.  The city and county should let them do their work and trust that they do a good job.  The city on the other hand needs to work the hardest at finding an alternative use for the current site.  That should be the most important thing on their minds at this time.  TC is a good choice from an economic standpoint and could very easily provide a beautiful location for the new center for ease of travel, amenities and nightlife. 

 

We already know the site location is bad as it cannot hold a large trade show.  That right there should be reason alone to not build behind TC.

 

** WHY BUILD A NEW CENTER IF IT MEANS BUILDING AN INFERIOR FACILITY? **

 

let put it in personal terms:  Would you build an addition to your home that adds no value nor addresses the needs it was built for?

 

People scream and holler that they are taxed without representation.  What are they going to say in ten years when the site is proven to be wrong and doesn't fit with the needs of large conventions/trade shows which we are trying to land DOWNTOWN.

 

This means we will need to keep the IX center open and nobody will spend money in the region since they will have their show - outside of downtown where all of our convention related infrastructure is located - and leave. That means downtown hotels, restaurants, cabs, businesses don't make any money.

 

Where are all of the upset RTA riders now?  Where are those upset that they are taxed without representation?  :roll:

 

People here are always screaming, "we demand better" yet you're settling for a substandard convention center.  Ain't that a blip?!

^I don't think the MM would allow a convention center be built if it can not support their largest trade shows they would bring to the area.  So therefore, if Cuyahoga County can not build a big enough center for their largest shows, than MM will back out and look elsewhere in the US therefore leaving Cuyahoga County to back out on building a center.  Then you will have your wish for no center to be built.  My point, if Cuyahoga County does not want to lose the MM, they will make the floor space large enough for MM largest conventions.  Obviously, our largest conventions will be attributed to them as that is what we are going after. 

Also, people who supported building a CC but want to keep the pricetag under $400 million are crazy to begin with.  If you support something, than have an open mind on cost.  I really think this is going back to the financing negotiations with the MM.

The medical mart show room and the convention center are two seperate things.

 

At this moment we already have large conventions/trade shows that are being held at the IX center.

 

They cannot be held downtown at the current CC. The new center wouldn't be any be much larger meaning those trade shows might decide to skip Cleveland.