The point that Litt brings up is very, VERY important to the project.

 

 

 

 

How Mall and other public spaces are handled is critical to success of medical mart project: Steven Litt

 

By Steven Litt, The Plain Dealer

January 09, 2010, 8:55PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- What a relief! Construction of the long-delayed medical mart and convention center complex could start this fall in downtown Cleveland, thanks to an agreement finalized Thursday between Cuyahoga County and MMPI Inc. of Chicago.

 

The construction administration agreement, negotiated for the county by Cleveland attorney Jeff Appelbaum, sets timetables and assigns clear and logical responsibilities for all parties in the $425 million, publicly financed project.

 

What's missing now, however, is a fundamental understanding that the public spaces, parks and pedestrian connections among the plan's various components have a bedrock importance to the success of the project.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2010/01/how_mall_and_other_public_spac.html

I think this was discussed earlier, but I wonder how disadvantaged the CC would be if only Mall B portion had the full ceiling height.  I think I could live with Mall B being elevated further above street level (if designed well), but the Lakeside trench would be pretty awful. 

I wonder if some portions of the malls could have long "ramps" (for want of a better term) that peak in the center of the rectangular malls. These ramps could look like plus + signs from the air. There convention space below the four quadrants created by the + signs would have the 30-foot vertical clearance. But the intent of the long ramps (each maybe 200 feet long, 30-50 feet wide and climbing to eight feet high before ramping down to the next street) would be to provide some security and sightlines of and from the street. That's my $0.02.

The most interesting news I noticed in Litt's piece was that it appears that the City will be upgrading the Public Auditorium themselves with the intention of keeping it integrated with the CC.  It is politically important to get this project done for under $425 million.  I wonder if one way of doing that without sacrificing too much quality is to break off pieces of the whole enchilada into different projects.  Maybe the Mall could be considered a separate, though obviously related project, with the improvements coming from a separate budget.  Obviously things like the roof structure's strength and skylight placement need to be coordinated between the two.

"The question is: Does the Constitution empower governments to seize a person's most precious property -- a home, a business -- and give it to more wealthy interests so that the government can reap, in taxes, ancillary benefits of that wealth? Connecticut's court says 'yes,' which turns the Fifth Amendment from a protection of the individual against overbearing government into a license for government to coerce individuals on behalf of society's strongest interests. Henceforth, what home or business will be safe from grasping governments pursuing their own convenience?"

 

- George F. Will "Despotism in New London," THE WASHINGTON POST, September 19, 2004

^Does anyone REALLY think they plan on taking the sportsman by emminant domain?  Reports are negotiations are going "well"...

I don't think the county will be using eminent domain to take a sandwich shop.

After the Connecticut ruling, Ohio made it tougher to do this.  Can't be done for nebulous economic development purposes.  Can't simply be turned over to private developers, even in this sort of context.  Hence the earlier discussion about making the Sportsman footprint into a "park" if it had to be taken through eminent domain.

I wonder if some portions of the malls could have long "ramps" (for want of a better term) that peak in the center of the rectangular malls. These ramps could look like plus + signs from the air. There convention space below the four quadrants created by the + signs would have the 30-foot vertical clearance. But the intent of the long ramps (each maybe 200 feet long, 30-50 feet wide and climbing to eight feet high before ramping down to the next street) would be to provide some security and sightlines of and from the street. That's my $0.02.

 

I am straining to visualize.  Are we thinking "tent"?

^

I think he's visualizing that the mall stays flat except for 4 inclines that meet at a high-point in the middle.

 

I'm really bad at explaining things but I hope that helped.

They should just build the Medical Mart ALL AROUND the Sportsman.  It could be Med Mart's internal bar.  :laugh:

The most interesting news I noticed in Litt's piece was that it appears that the City will be upgrading the Public Auditorium themselves with the intention of keeping it integrated with the CC.

 

That's certainly what Litt said, but I wonder if that's really news or just reporting the city's default long term, currently unfunded intention.

 

By the way, were there ever any details about what exactly the renovations of PA would be?  Would the main space be carved into windowless meeting rooms?  Would this mean losing the big space?

Mark Falanga,MMPI, originally said the upper floors of Public Hall would be used for meeting rooms and ballroom space.

^MMPI has dropped all plans for Public Hall, at this moment.  It can and probably will change.

^I hear ya, I was just curious what the plans were.  I didn't know there were floors above the main auditorium space so I always wondered how MMP was going to spin some meeting rooms out of that building without spending a $zillions.

main auditorium space is in Public Hall, above ground.  The Convention center is roughly under the mall.  So, MMPI is walking away from using the Auditorium.

http://www.clevelandmedicalmart.com/

 

 

Public Hall is currently being show as part of the facility on the Cleveland Medical Mart and Convention Centers website. It is under the "full facility diagram" and the "convention center floor plans".

^I guess those renderings haven't been updated as of yet... it would still be great for the PA to be part of the larger plan in some way.

^I guess those renderings haven't been updated as of yet... it would still be great for the PA to be part of the larger plan in some way.

 

Absolutely--the Public Hall and accompanying theatres are treasures for our community.  They should have never been let go this long....

More PD coverage of the NY Med Mart competition:

 

"As Cleveland settles medical mart questions, rival New York project raises new ones"

 

Full story: http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2010/01/as_cleveland_settles_medical_mart_questions_rival_new_york_project_raises_new_ones.html

 

Manhattan office rents are falling through the floor (soon to fall lower than DC according to NPR this morning) and vacancy is soaring.  Makes me worry a little more now about his proposal.

 

Cuyahoga Commissioner Tim Hagan downplayed the idea of a three-city race.

 

"The bottom line is that we're not competing with anybody," Hagan said. "We've got a unique setting here. What we have is 70,000 or so people working in the health care industry in the community ... the dominance of the Cleveland Clinic nationally and internationally.

 

"It's comparing apples and oranges here."

 

yeah but come on now tim, just for the record as of 2008 there are over 400,000 direct health care industry jobs in nyc alone (ie., hospital jobs, etc.), and that is not including related businesses like corporate hq's, pharmaceutical companies, etc. -- so that's a lot of local ny health business too. i've no idea what nashville has going for it locally, vandy and...?

 

 

From PD: Nashville Moves Ahead with Plan for Medical Mart

 

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Competition to the medical mart complex proposed for downtown Cleveland has moved ahead.

 

The Nashville Metro Council Tuesday night approved a new $585-million convention center, clearing the way for the existing center to be transformed into a $250-million, 12-story medical mart.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2010/01/post.html

 

Soooo they are seeking private financing for a $250M med mart?  Interesting.

 

And building a 1.5M sf addition and retrofitting their old convention center will only cost $250M?  [background inf from http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2009/11/30/medical_mart_chooses_convention_center_home]

If nothing else, Nashville's plan SOUNDS more compelling than ours.  And things that sound compelling have a better shot of lining up funding than things that don't.  Sounds like their convention center alone will cost the city/county/state more than we've budgeted for our entire project, and like they have a fairly clear vision of their medical mart component.  This is one series of stories I'm glad the PD is running.  I hope our leadership gets on the ball.  If our main advantage is having financing in the bag, we squander it every single day that we don't break ground.

There's a little more info about the Nashville project's private financing in here: http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2009/12/14/race_to_market

 

According to the project's developers, they need to pre-lease about 65-70% of their massive mart to move forward with financing.  They will probably also pursue TIFs and abatement and other public money too, so it won't all be private money.

"First to market" for this project is not that important.  The most important piece of the Medical Mart (or anything remotely similar to it) is clientele or customer list, etc..  The first MedMart to open will not have a patent that prevents others from opening.  At this level of business, it is almost "ALL" about connections, politics, clientele, or whatever you want to call it..

 

Nashville's could be 5 times bigger than Cleveland's, and be completed one year earlier, but it just won't matter if they can't get anyone to play in their sandbox.

^ totally agree.

Still, I wonder about the reason for the size discrepancy between the 3 projects.  Are we thinking too small, or they too big?  I'd hate to open an oversized, half empty facility, but I'd equally hate to leave a lot of clients on the table for competition to snatch up and use to build a core of tenants for a competing facility.

Still, I wonder about the reason for the size discrepancy between the 3 projects.  Are we thinking too small, or they too big?  I'd hate to open an oversized, half empty facility, but I'd equally hate to leave a lot of clients on the table for competition to snatch up and use to build a core of tenants for a competing facility.

 

Are you asking about the Convention Center portion?  If you are I say "yes". 

 

Are you asking about the Medical Mart portion?  Who knows, but there is land for expansion.

Both I suppose, but mostly the Medical Mart.

At 2M sf, the Nashville mart would be 16 times larger than ours.  Given that, I don't understand how these projects are even discussed in the same sentence...  Weird.

Both I suppose, but mostly the Medical Mart.

 

I think our medical mart is proposed at the right size.  The market will determine if we need to build more space.

 

All of their buildings, have a phase two or three , so MMPI, in my opinion, knows how to propertly market and manage their spaces.

 

In addition, their properties have forced other people who want to have independent showrooms to locate them close to their owned/managed marts.

At 2M sf, the Nashville mart would be 16 times larger than ours.  Given that, I don't understand how these projects are even discussed in the same sentence...  Weird.

 

the "marts" and the "convention centers" should be viewed as two different spaces as they do two different things.

^The 2M for Nashville is just their MM, at least as it has been reported in the Nashville paper.  And our MM will be 120K. 

Well... good luck getting 65% of that filled (to secure financing), especially with the competition for tenants coming from NYC and Cleveland.

^The 2M for Nashville is just their MM, at least as it has been reported in the Nashville paper.  And our MM will be 120K. 

 

all I see is 12 story building in Nashville.

An unrelated story that's big in the news today gives me the impression that overconfidence is rarely productive.  The exact value of first-to-market is debatable... but at the same time it seems inherent in the project's underlying concept.  You can't offer one-stop-shopping when there's another stop in another city with different vendors.  This would also prevent us from promising to vendors a convergence of the entire national market.

An unrelated story that's big in the news today gives me the impression that overconfidence is rarely productive.  The exact value of first-to-market is debatable... but at the same time it seems inherent in the project's underlying concept.  You can't offer one-stop-shopping when there's another stop in another city with different vendors. This would also prevent us from promising to vendors a convergence of the entire national market.

 

Did we ever intend to promise that?

An unrelated story that's big in the news today gives me the impression that overconfidence is rarely productive.  The exact value of first-to-market is debatable... but at the same time it seems inherent in the project's underlying concept.  You can't offer one-stop-shopping when there's another stop in another city with different vendors.  This would also prevent us from promising to vendors a convergence of the entire national market.

 

If the exhibitors are of lesser quality, then it's a win win.  Just like there are several design marts.  The Pacific Design center isn't threatened by the Dallas Market Place.

An unrelated story that's big in the news today gives me the impression that overconfidence is rarely productive.  The exact value of first-to-market is debatable... but at the same time it seems inherent in the project's underlying concept.  You can't offer one-stop-shopping when there's another stop in another city with different vendors. This would also prevent us from promising to vendors a convergence of the entire national market.

 

Did we ever intend to promise that?

 

Seemed like it.  If not, then what did we ever intend to promise?  On what grounds are we suggesting to vendors that they rent a showroom in Cleveland?  If we're implying that doing so would lead directly to CCF accounts... 1) I don't think anyone but CCF can promise that, and 2) I doubt that would be sufficient anyway.  Why not just send sales reps to CCF?  Thus, the proximity of our local healthcare sector has very little bearing on all this.  Actual product would seem far more important. 

 

As the competition releases news about what their projects WILL be, we keep seeing news from here about what ours WON'T be, and about all the machinations here blocking the way.  Can't use this building, must use this building, can't build here or there.  What are prospecitve tenants supposed to think of the business climate here?  Compared with Nashville and NYC we have some ground to make up in that department and I don't see where we're even trying.

An unrelated story that's big in the news today gives me the impression that overconfidence is rarely productive.  The exact value of first-to-market is debatable... but at the same time it seems inherent in the project's underlying concept.  You can't offer one-stop-shopping when there's another stop in another city with different vendors. This would also prevent us from promising to vendors a convergence of the entire national market.

 

Did we ever intend to promise that?

 

Seemed like it.  If not, then what did we ever intend to promise?  On what grounds are we suggesting to vendors that they rent a showroom in Cleveland?  If we're implying that doing so would lead directly to CCF accounts... 1) I don't think anyone but CCF can promise that, and 2) I doubt that would be sufficient anyway.  Why not just send sales reps to CCF?  Thus, the proximity of our local healthcare sector has very little bearing on all this.  Actual product would seem far more important. 

 

As the competition releases news about what their projects WILL be, we keep seeing news from here about what ours WON'T be, and about all the machinations here blocking the way. Can't use this building, must use this building, can't build here or there.  What are prospective tenants supposed to think of the business climate here?  Compared with Nashville and NYC we have some ground to make up in that department and I don't see where we're even trying.

 

I swear you make more out of nothing better than anyone I know! 

[*]We wont send sales reps to CCF, because CC and UH would be a consumers at the medical mart.

[*]Just because they announce A, B, C, that does not mean it will come to fruition!  In the PR business, you always want to one up your competition and "steal their thunder" and create "reasonable doubt".

[*]"use this building, must use this building, can't build here or there."  WTH??

[*]What are exhibitors to think about the business climate?  Nothing, they are putting their items on display in a building as they themselves try to drum up business.  The negotiations and building of this project have no direct affect on their end use, once building is completed.  I'm sure there is just as much "drama" in NashVegas and NYC.  Neither of which has a dime.

[*]Please describe for us readers what "ground" we have to make up.  Please cite a reputable source.

 

 

On a different note it doesn't seem like the people of Nashville want this to go on without a vote.

 

http://www.nashvillespriorities.org/

[*]We wont send sales reps to CCF, because CC and UH would be a consumers at the medical mart.

[*]Just because they announce A, B, C, that does not mean it will come to fruition!  In the PR business, you always want to one up your competition and "steal their thunder" and create "reasonable doubt".

[*]"use this building, must use this building, can't build here or there."  WTH??

[*]What are exhibitors to think about the business climate?  Nothing, they are putting their items on display in a building as they themselves try to drum up business.  The negotiations and building of this project have no direct affect on their end use, once building is completed.  I'm sure there is just as much "drama" in NashVegas and NYC.  Neither of which has a dime.

[*]Please describe for us readers what "ground" we have to make up.  Please cite a reputable source.

 

 

 

1.  Pronoun discord: I meant the prospective tenant could send reps to CCF w/o renting space.

 

2.  You're right.  And what have we done to one-up the other projects?

 

3.  We've obviously had site selection problems and loud public disputes.  We still don't have a clear visualization of what we're going to build.  MMPI has indicicated that Public Hall is ununsable/unmarketable for this purpose, yet the issue of Public Hall somehow lingers.

 

4-5.  Are you serious? 

1.  Pronoun discord: I meant the prospective tenant could send reps to CCF w/o renting space.

 

2.  You're right.  And what have we done to one-up the other projects?

 

3.  We've obviously had site selection problems and loud public disputes.  We still don't have a clear visualization of what we're going to build.  MMPI has indicicated that Public Hall is ununsable/unmarketable for this purpose, yet the issue of Public Hall somehow lingers.

 

4-5.  Are you serious? 

   

[*]No.  They aren't going to send a Rep with tons of equipment to CC. The cost would be prohibitive. It's not about just CC.  Don't you get that.  This about bringing people in the medical services and related industries from all over to Cleveland to buy equipment, have tutorials/seminars, conferences and all types of convention's.

[*]We've already got financing!  Pretty big step.  Again, what have they dont to discount our project?  Not a damn thing.

[*]Oh...their projects are going to go off drama free.  Puh-lease.  I'm sure there will be issues with design and building both these buildings.

[*]Yes...I'm dead serious.

This link does help me with #3 (which I was equally cynical as 327).  Looks like Nashville may not be drama free (or be going totally smoothly as they have been so good at making us think) after all.  Good find.

 

On a different note it doesn't seem like the people of Nashville want this to go on without a vote.

 

http://www.nashvillespriorities.org/

This about bringing people in the medical services and related industries from all over to Cleveland to buy equipment, have tutorials/seminars, conferences and all types of convention's.

 

Whoa there, this most certainly is NOT about bringing in folks from all over Cleveland to do anything.  This project, according to MMP, is about bringing people from other places TO Cleveland to stay in our hotels and eat in our restaurants and spend money here.  I can't tell if you missed/mixed up some prepositions or if you really meant what you typed.

^You misread Strap.  Prepare.... try to telegraph it

 

Regarding our square footage, how is that measured - entire building? or just the "showrooms"?

This about bringing people in the medical services and related industries from all over to Cleveland to buy equipment, have tutorials/seminars, conferences and all types of convention's.

 

Whoa there, this most certainly is NOT about bringing in folks from all over Cleveland to do anything.  This project, according to MMP, is about bringing people from other places TO Cleveland to stay in our hotels and eat in our restaurants and spend money here.  I can't tell if you missed/mixed up some prepositions or if you really meant what you typed.

 

Spending money local is a given.  I didn't think I need to say that.

^You misread Strap.  Prepare.... try to telegraph it

 

Regarding our square footage, how is that measured - entire building? or just the "showrooms"?

 

Thats what I cant figure out.  I would like to see the following broken down: 

[*]Showroom space in each city

[*]Convention Center total exhibit space in each city.

^^Oh man I was asking for that!  Mea culpa!  I managed to survive the missing words in your sentence but mentally deleted a key "to" in there.  We're on the same page.

 

Hts, you're right, the 120K sf is described by MMP as the size of the showrooms, so total facility size would obviously be larger.  But still an order of magnitude smaller than the Nashville facility (as it's described in the press).

 

Looks like medcity news just picked up the Nashville news:

 

http://www.medcitynews.com/index.php/2010/01/nashville-medical-marts-developers-claim-projects-future-has-been-secured-still-offer-no-details-of-financing/

 

 

1,200 showrooms in NashVegas.  I laugh!  ::)

I am not sweating this one. From the MedCity article "The project's developers have previously said they'd seek private funding, coupled with an infusion of their own cash, for the $250 million medical mart". Yeah good luck with that one. Cleveland's got da money in the bank son.