under mall a is a parking garage... the dip is definitely below lakeside and was discussed during the site selection.

So if there will be a dip in the ceiling, and the loading docks are on the south end only, why not make the ceilings on the north side of the dip at the same height as the dip and keep the view to the north? This seems elementary so there must be something I am missing. 

Because they want the 30' ceilings in as much space as possible.

But if you can't get the sailboat from under Mall B to under Mall C because of St. Clair what is the point of having a high ceiling under Mall C?

Because many things can be assembled in the appropriate space.  Or can be tilted during that low point stretch and uprighted when back in the "clear".

^Just shimmy it through!

Because many things can be assembled in the appropriate space. Or can be tilted during that low point stretch and uprighted when back in the "clear".

 

Also, the higher ceilings make the space feel larger and more open.

A little off-topic, but is it possible that the county could move it's headquarters to the Breuer Building and Rotunda (now that it is in the hands of the county again) and leave it's old land at the mall open for development for the MM? Wouldn't that give the developers the amount of land they wish for and move the county headquarters to somewhere with more room (which I'm assuming will be needed because of Issue 6 passing)? Sounds, to me, like that would kill two birds with one stone.

A little off-topic, but is it possible that the county could move it's headquarters to the Breuer Building and Rotunda (now that it is in the hands of the county again) and leave it's old land at the mall open for development for the MM? Wouldn't that give the developers the amount of land they wish for and move the county headquarters to somewhere with more room (which I'm assuming will be needed because of Issue 6 passing)? Sounds, to me, like that would kill two birds with one stone.

 

The breuer bldg. doesn't fit teh counties needs.  check that thread for more discussion.  However, you are right, that if they vacate their property it would open up more space for development of the CC

I figured they could just renovate it to match their needs. But I guess since they didn't want to do that last time, they probably wouldn't do it this time either. Of course, there's always the option of tearing down the Breuer Tower and building the headquarters from scratch but that would probably be unpopular. Oh well.

Please search for and read the cuyahoga count headquarters relocation thread. They aren't going to be doing anything themselves. There is no money now that the cc project is going on. If they move they will lease existing space or though however unlikely move into a new building a private developer develops.

Please search for and read the cuyahoga count headquarters relocation thread. They aren't going to be doing anything themselves. There is no money now that the cc project is going on. If they move they will lease existing space or though however unlikely move into a new building a private developer develops.

sorry, I searched for the Breuer Tower thread and saw nothing in that. I didn't know there was a thread on the Cuyahoga County headquarters relocation. Carry on.

I've got it.  How about the county leases the Breuer Tower form the current owner!  Let the owner pay for all the tennant imporvements!

Any coordination between MMPI and the North Coast transportion center

 

North Coast Transportation Center isn't an entity, it's a concept and a facility that would be built and owned by an as-yet unidentified sponsor, such as RTA (not interested), port authority (unaware) or the city. The city wants to conduct engineering for this project and advance it as part of the convention center, but funding may be difficult to find.

 

Unless you're suggesting that the NCTC be built as part of the Medical Mart? I've pondered that, but I don't know if the city has.

I am starting to think "boondoggle".

At the very least, they should share design principles

BOONDOGGLE !! I no longer believe MMPI is competent enough to bring this project to fruition. Still no site. No deal with the city. Bait and Switch. This is ludicrous. It is time to cut losses and find another developer.

:?  Is there even another medical mart developer out there?  I am starting to loose faith in MMPI and their ability to make this project move forward...

 

 

Med mart change stuns city, which must OK new location

Proposed for the northern edge of downtown's Mall C, the design is the best alternative for a $425 million convention center complex, said developer MMPI, which last week abandoned plans to incorporate historic Public Auditorium into the project.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/11/med_mart_change_stuns_city_whi.html

I truely think the change in employment with the commissioners this past week, and Hagens friendship with Kennedy has something to do woth this.  I really do.  I understand the public hall thing as that was news in the industry a couple months ago, but ever since the election last week, most of the news makes it sound like MMPI is on the fence with this project.  After they determined they didn't want public hall a couple months ago, they were still committed, but now...well.

I can understand their cold feet. Everyone they have worked on with this is on their way out the door after Issue 6 passed and chances are whomever replaces the current commisioners will have an ax to grind on nearly everthing the current adminstration has worked on, including the tax to fund this. That being said unless they are trying to hide something major and this IS a viable project they should be moving forward as planned. I hope that they are just dragging their feet trying to develop a revised tatical plan for the pending changes in the county. Or even better they are playing hardball and it is a giant bluff for the St. Clair landowners...

(big) IF the MM can be constructed in a way that is consistant with the original Burnham vision, and it better connects the mall to the lakefront/harbor, and if a North Coast Transportation Center can be combined with it, then I think it is a better plan than the original

 

I like Polensic's idea to extend the tax a couple of years and renovate Public Hall, if we can't get MMPI to do it

Combine it with the 3-C Train Station and I'm so sold.  Let's not be afraid to think outside the box on this dilemma. 

 

What an amazing turn of events of that could happen...

Gotribe- I thought Hagan was not going to run for reelection the next time around, same with Jones.  And at this point, I don't think Dimora is a factor.

 

I would have to agree with Polensek.  To make up $30 million, the sales tax would have to be stretched out only 1 year longer than the 20 years under contract.  Currently, the sales tax is generating around $45 million a year (correct me if I'm wrong).  What's one more year if we can get a complete project and a renovated Public Auditorium?   

(big) IF the MM can be constructed in a way that is consistant with the original Burnham vision, and it better connects the mall to the lakefront/harbor, and if a North Coast Transportation Center can be combined with it, then I think it is a better plan than the original

 

I like Polensic's idea to extend the tax a couple of years and renovate Public Hall, if we can't get MMPI to do it

 

Now THAT would be great.  I'm all for that as well!  But what to do with Public Auditorium?  If the MM could complete (finally) Burnham's vision, I would still like to see the Auditorium get some type of new life.

Litt had some interesting comments...

 

Sudden Mall C proposal for Medical Mart raises stakes on architecture for Cleveland and Merchandise Mart Properties Inc.

By Steven Litt

November 11, 2009

 

The sudden proposal by MMPI of Chicago to build the medical mart at the north end of downtown Cleveland's public Mall is an architectural shocker.

 

But it need not be an architectural stinker.

 

If carried out with brilliance -- and that's the big if-- a medical mart on the north end of the Mall could give the century-old public space the vitality and completeness it has never had because it was never truly finished.

 

In 1903, Chicago architect Daniel Burnham and the Group Plan Commission designed the Mall as the centerpiece of a Beaux-Arts civic center framed by neoclassical civic and government buildings.

 

The composition was to have been capped at the north end by the city's principal train station, which would have pumped people and traffic throughout the space.

 

more at: http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/11/sudden_mall_c_proposal_for_med.html

If the new building echoes the size, form and footprint of the older buildings too closely, the effect could be monotonous and dull. If it departs from the other buildings too radically, the effect could be jarring.

 

The situation calls for a landmark worthy of the spotlight but also capable of playing a graceful role as part of a larger ensemble.

 

My thoughts/concerns exactly Mr. Litt.

 

I am not going to dig my feet in here and will wait for rendering, but I just can't envision how a modern, glassy structure at the north end of Mall C could possibly mesh with the other civic buildings that will surround it.

 

I still do have a stong gut feeling that this is a negotiation tactic and MMPI and the property owners at 113 St. Clair are just trying to get the other side to flinch.  In hindsight, the biggest mistake so far was officially announcing the Mall site for the CC/MM without first reaching a deal with the property owners.  By announcing first, MMPI and the County lost a lot of leverage.  The property owners now know that there property will be surrounded by the hustle and bustle of a CC and, if nothing else, their parcel will be worth something to another developer for use as a hotel or other use associated with a CC.  They should have been forced to sign off when they faced the prospect of no new development on adjacent properties.

Still no further mention of the County administration site as an option here.? (I want to see that building gone)  It just seems like creating access for the Mall C site would be to complicated and mess up this area. 

I would love to see a design that incorporates the size and scope of the proposed train station, but with design elements of the North Coast harbor which is dominated by the Rock Hall.  White tile, glass, large geometric shapes.  It can have a cheesy tag line like respecting the past, looking to the future.

 

Whatever is designed we are sure of one thing, W. 28th will be disappointed

 

( :-) I kid, I kid)

i mean a grand european style train station was one thing, but it really doesnt seem like a medmart is worth putting in such a focal spot.

 

For real.  The med mart is not going to be a very large building, so I really don't see how it can add the appropriate gravitas to the end of the mall. 

 

On the other hand, I think the mall is a pretty dismal failure as a civic/public space so I'm not terribly worried about screwing it up.  I think the stakes are a little exaggerated.  The lake view is barely visible from the southern end of the mall because of the elevation of Mall B (and was even less visible when the Hannah Fountains were installed).  Putting aside its landmark status, I would actually favor some radical rethinking of the whole mall, and this project would be a good vehicle for it.

From the peedee article Mark Falanga, senior vice president of MMPI says:

 

"I think the city will embrace it," Falanga said. "It provides a venue in the city, a vista over the lake, a link to the train tracks. For the trade show hall, it provides a more direct link between the medical mart showrooms and the exhibit hall. In that regard, it makes it a better layout and one that's more functional."

 

I am not disappointed in the location change, and I want to believe that MMPI is sincere in their thinking. As long as this not not some negotiation tactic to drive the price down for the St. Clair property, I believe this is a great opportunity. Public Hall will be fine, their will be a use for it down the road. This will give them more money to use towards building a truly great MM. I am hoping that the architects see this as a opportunity to do something great, every architect wants that chance. As far as the design I love the placing of a forward thinking, contemporary building among historic surroundings. And the fact that Falanga even recognises the fact about the train tracks should give us all encouragement. If we can believe them then I don't see this as a setback at all.

          / \

          /    \

        /    \

      /        \

    /_______\_

    |            |

    _|_______|_____

              /

            /

          /

Serious rendering of MM.         

                / \

              /    \

              /    \

          /        \

          /_______\_

      *  |            |  *

      |  _|_______|    |

 

Don't forget the trees...  All good renderings show some trees.  :-)

Wait, is it proposed to go ON Mall C or just NORTH of Mall C (over the train tracks)? I like the idea of building it north of Mall C, but I'm not a fan of building in on Mall C. But i guess beggars can't be choosers...

^It sounds like it is a half-and-half deal.  It will go on the "north end" of Mall C and overhang the dropoff down to the tracks.  There is a decent amount of space north of the Mall and South of the Tracks.  In some older renderings, a very large terrace was envisioned for that area.

MMPI....."MMPI remains committed to bringing "a world-class facility to Cleveland," said Mark Falanga, senior vice president of MMPI. The company wants to present information to City Council in a month or so, Falanga said, but said the project's overall schedule is unclear."

 

........"in a month or so"...and the county is paying MMPI $333,333 a month.

I think it's a great idea as well. I think the complaint of lake views being obscured is ridiculous. A great landmark type building between two older iconic buildings could be amazing. I agree the city can deal with Public Auditorium later and perhaps incorporate it somehow down the road. I just hope some people don't turn this into an uproar and stymie the whole deal, would be a real shame.

I think the MM now is proposed to go between City Hall and the old county courthouse, but I don't think that's the best approach. Instead, a more expansive version of the North Coast Transportation Center (below) could incorporate both the Amtrak/3C/high-speed rail/light-rail transit/bus station and the MM while still preserving the vistas of the lakefront from the malls and linking them to the attractions at North Coast Harbor. To me, it's a win all the way around.....

 

 

For more images of this proposed facility, see the North Coast Transportation Center thread at:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17673.0.html

Pure speculation, I wonder if they are trying to get thier ducks in a row to be shovel ready in case there is a second stimulus package. 

At this point, I just wish somebody would do something, even if it's wrong.

They stated they did not want to use available historic tax credits to renovate Public Auditorium. What could that reasoning be? Does anyone understand the direction of this project anymore?? How in the world do you market this? Who will sign up to a unknown location in a yet to be built facility? What is MMPI's experience in pubic/private partnerships? Is the City of Cleveland foolish enough to give up THE premier pubic space downtown? Are we that desperate? I want the Convention Center rebuilt. As long as the Mall remains intact, I could care less where they put the MM. If not the St.Clair Site, get rid of the County Administration Buildings.

I was wondering about the historic tax credits myself, but I assume the reason they won't use them is because of the restrictions on renovations to the building if they did use them, meaning they probably couldn't update it to the point they wanted.

 

I'm kind of curious how the Mall being on the National Register of Historic Places will impact any kind of building on top of it.  It doesn't seem like there is much control over the property from a federal perspective, but, according to the site, the state historic preservation office might have a say in it: (http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/faq.htm#restrictions).

They stated they did not want to use available historic tax credits to renovate Public Auditorium. What could that reasoning be? Does anyone understand the direction of this project anymore?? How in the world do you market this? Who will sign up to a unknown location in a yet to be built facility? What is MMPI's experience in pubic/private partnerships? Is the City of Cleveland foolish enough to give up THE premier pubic space downtown? Are we that desperate? I want the Convention Center rebuilt. As long as the Mall remains intact, I could care less where they put the MM. If not the St.Clair Site, get rid of the County Administration Buildings.

 

Something tells me that you love conspiracy theories.

They stated they did not want to use available historic tax credits to renovate Public Auditorium. What could that reasoning be? Does anyone understand the direction of this project anymore?? How in the world do you market this? Who will sign up to a unknown location in a yet to be built facility? What is MMPI's experience in pubic/private partnerships? Is the City of Cleveland foolish enough to give up THE premier pubic space downtown? Are we that desperate? I want the Convention Center rebuilt. As long as the Mall remains intact, I could care less where they put the MM. If not the St.Clair Site, get rid of the County Administration Buildings.

 

Something tells me that you love conspiracy theories.

 

Something tells me this is no place for personal messages.

 

Just what conspiracy are you talking about? How do you leap to such a conclusion? Because I am curious about their thought process behind decisions?

I think the MM now is proposed to go between City Hall and the old county courthouse, but I don't think that's the best approach. Instead, a more expansive version of the North Coast Transportation Center (below) could incorporate both the Amtrak/3C/high-speed rail/light-rail transit/bus station and the MM while still preserving the vistas of the lakefront from the malls and linking them to the attractions at North Coast Harbor. To me, it's a win all the way around.....

 

 

For more images of this proposed facility, see the North Coast Transportation Center thread at:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17673.0.html

 

Where would you site the MM in the more expansive transportation center?

 

Back on the convention center, does it seem to anyone that the PA repair costs "surprise" and the issues with the St Clair property owners are pretty big misses, given the amount of time this project has been dragging on?  The ducks have definitely been resistant to lining up in the proverbial row.  I hope they don't later find that half the bathtub is missing, lol.

 

I hope the property taxes for that St. Clair property jump up in a big way; clearly its owners agree that the property is worth a ton.

 

Where would you site the MM in the more expansive transportation center?

 

 

I think the question is, "where would I site the transportation center in the MM?" In the image from the previous page, I would take the floor plate of the NCTC and double or even triple it to whatever is necessary for the square footage needed for the MM. Then I would add on to that facility a small but expandable space for a transportation center.

 

EDIT: here's a view of the lakefront as proposed in the city's Civic Vision 2000 plan. Sorry it's so small, as the original was stretched across an 8.5x14 page. But you can see where a part of the convention center, combined with another variation of the North Coast Transportation Center, was proposed to be sited -- just to the north of Mall C over the tracks (ID'd as "11"). The short version is, there's a million ways to do this.......

 

They stated they did not want to use available historic tax credits to renovate Public Auditorium. What could that reasoning be? Does anyone understand the direction of this project anymore?? How in the world do you market this? Who will sign up to a unknown location in a yet to be built facility? What is MMPI's experience in pubic/private partnerships? Is the City of Cleveland foolish enough to give up THE premier pubic space downtown? Are we that desperate? I want the Convention Center rebuilt. As long as the Mall remains intact, I could care less where they put the MM. If not the St.Clair Site, get rid of the County Administration Buildings.

 

Something tells me that you love conspiracy theories.

 

Uh, that would be me.

I hope the property taxes for that St. Clair property jump up in a big way; clearly its owners agree that the property is worth a ton.

 

"Clearly" you THINK you know something about the asking prices. Would you like to share or just "clearly" speculate as to the situation?

^You are "clearly" correct- it was mere speculation that the county/MMP was offering L&R more than the roughly $10.9 that the auditor estimates the four parcels are worth (and on which their tax bill is based).  That estimate is pretty dated, however, so I suppose it's just as likely the county is offering a lot less, which would mean a nice downward revision for L&R.