Ha ha don't tell that to Litt....he seems to think the "symbolism" of the dna windows is more important than, I don't know....letting in light to the building!

 

That design needs to evolve a great deal. More windows and less blank expanses of concrete is a good start. We don't need windows that look like DNA, any more than we need DNA that looks like windows. We just need an attractive and functional structure. The architects need to quit being cutesy and focus on that. Classical design elements probably wouldn't hurt.  

I would be shocked if either Willard or Huntington are demoed. Both are cash cows. Plus, you take either of thos down and the WHD surface lots become that much more valuable. They are both built into a hillside and put behind buildings you are going to build nothing up against.... and built between those buildings and the shoreway. We need more garages like those two, not less.

 

Right! As much as I love the Seattle proposal, tearing down the garages for the grassy hill concept made zero sense. It's not like that would magically make the area some calm, pastoral setting with the railroad and shoreway right there. More infrastructure- not less- is the solution to connecting downtown to the lakefront.

Ha ha don't tell that to Litt....he seems to think the "symbolism" of the dna windows is more important than, I don't know....letting in light to the building!

 

That design needs to evolve a great deal.  More windows and less blank expanses of concrete is a good start.  We don't need windows that look like DNA, any more than we need DNA that looks like windows.  We just need an attractive and functional structure.  The architects need to quit being cutesy and focus on that.  Classical design elements probably wouldn't hurt. 

 

I have to ask this once again.  How many of you know what a Merchandise Mart is and what it's function is? 

 

I am not an expert, but I think this is a situation where the Exterior design of the building needs to take a back seat to the forum and function of the interior of the building.

 

Most showrooms have NO WINDOWS.  When the showrooms are designed, they are usually designed with fake windows since they need hard/flat wall surface for displaying their goods.  I don't want this to be a big bland box like the Atlanta or Dallas merchandise marts.

 

I think this building should be built and designed to blend well with it's surrounds/environment, but at the same time people need realize it's (most likely) going to have few windows and that design aspect/element should be discussed and explained.

I would be shocked if either Willard or Huntington are demoed.  Both are cash cows.  Plus, you take either of thos down and the WHD surface lots become that much more valuable.  They are both built into a hillside and put behind buildings you are going to build nothing up against.... and built between those buildings and the shoreway.  We need more garages like those two, not less.

 

Right! As much as I love the Seattle proposal, tearing down the garages for the grassy hill concept made zero sense. It's not like that would magically make the area some calm, pastoral setting with the railroad and shoreway right there. More infrastructure- not less- is the solution to connecting downtown to the lakefront.

 

I disagree.  To me that proposal would be similar to the brooklyn promenande, with the BQE, Furman and Columbia streets directly under.  I lived right before moving to Harlem and it wasn't that bad nor did it stop people walking the promenade or just sitting out and taking in the view.

 

It hasn't stopped people from coming out to enjoy a day.

Could be worse. Check out the design for the Furniture Mart in Hickory North Carolina. No windows (except for the entrance), no pedestrianism, no character and no chance I will ever visit it....

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=2220+Hwy+70+SE+%E2%80%A2&aq=&sll=35.702997,-81.297498&sspn=0.004827,0.010986&gl=us&ie=UTF8&t=h&rq=1&ev=zi&split=1&radius=0.37&hq=2220+Hwy+70+SE+%E2%80%A2&hnear=&ll=35.703595,-81.297397&spn=0,0.010986&z=17&layer=c&cbll=35.703595,-81.297397&panoid=l1Ym9Vzrh-yi0Sifq6oUTA&cbp=12,201.81,,0,7.02

Ha ha don't tell that to Litt....he seems to think the "symbolism" of the dna windows is more important than, I don't know....letting in light to the building!

 

That design needs to evolve a great deal. More windows and less blank expanses of concrete is a good start. We don't need windows that look like DNA, any more than we need DNA that looks like windows. We just need an attractive and functional structure. The architects need to quit being cutesy and focus on that. Classical design elements probably wouldn't hurt.  

 

I have to ask this once again. How many of you know what a Merchandise Mart is and what it's function is?

 

I am not an expert, but I think this is a situation where the Exterior design of the building needs to take a back seat to the forum and function of the interior of the building.

 

Most showrooms have NO WINDOWS. When the showrooms are designed, they are usually designed with fake windows since they need hard/flat wall surface for displaying their goods. I don't want this to be a big bland box like the Atlanta or Dallas merchandise marts.

 

I think this building should be built and designed to blend well with it's surrounds/environment, but at the same time people need realize it's (most likely) going to have few windows and that design aspect/element should be discussed and explained.

 

I don't.  Maybe MMPI does:

 

"MMPI wants more daylight on the south façade of the medical mart, which meant asking the architects to put more glass and less pre-cast concrete on that side to send more daylight into interior showrooms. "

More pics... this time, from the west.  If someone could get on top of that windmill and take some shots, we would have all four angles covered ;)

 

 

 

 

The first photo above shows what they are talking about when the idea of removing the top level.  It is about about 10 feet above the edge of mall C. If there is money (:)) I can see them removing that top level

Ha ha don't tell that to Litt....he seems to think the "symbolism" of the dna windows is more important than, I don't know....letting in light to the building!

 

That design needs to evolve a great deal.  More windows and less blank expanses of concrete is a good start.  We don't need windows that look like DNA, any more than we need DNA that looks like windows.  We just need an attractive and functional structure.  The architects need to quit being cutesy and focus on that.  Classical design elements probably wouldn't hurt. 

 

I have to ask this once again.  How many of you know what a Merchandise Mart is and what it's function is? 

 

I am not an expert, but I think this is a situation where the Exterior design of the building needs to take a back seat to the forum and function of the interior of the building.

 

Most showrooms have NO WINDOWS.  When the showrooms are designed, they are usually designed with fake windows since they need hard/flat wall surface for displaying their goods.  I don't want this to be a big bland box like the Atlanta or Dallas merchandise marts.

 

I think this building should be built and designed to blend well with it's surrounds/environment, but at the same time people need realize it's (most likely) going to have few windows and that design aspect/element should be discussed and explained.

 

I don't.  Maybe MMPI does:

 

"MMPI wants more daylight on the south façade of the medical mart, which meant asking the architects to put more glass and less pre-cast concrete on that side to send more daylight into interior showrooms. "

 

Thats one side of the building.  But that doesn't mean there are going to be alot of windows.

Client might ask, but its going to be them and LMN to decide exactly how much. We know the image they have is only a placeholder, and that I am sure the design has come a long way since then. MMPI might know what they think they want, but its going to be a test in progress. Remember, a Medical Mart=/=merchandise mart. Any building that is the first of its kind (look at nuclear reactor design) is basically a big test. No one knows specifically down to every detail how much daylighting is good for medical showrooms in a medical mart in Cleveland, ohio. Exactly how much light they want is going to be a time thing, no one knows for certain. I just hope the windows are operable. I am certain, however, that it won't be way too much or too little. LMN and MMPI will get it right (inside is more important to the success of this building) and it will look "nice" in the end.

I would be shocked if either Willard or Huntington are demoed.  Both are cash cows.  Plus, you take either of thos down and the WHD surface lots become that much more valuable.  They are both built into a hillside and put behind buildings you are going to build nothing up against.... and built between those buildings and the shoreway.  We need more garages like those two, not less.

 

Right! As much as I love the Seattle proposal, tearing down the garages for the grassy hill concept made zero sense. It's not like that would magically make the area some calm, pastoral setting with the railroad and shoreway right there. More infrastructure- not less- is the solution to connecting downtown to the lakefront.

 

I disagree.  To me that proposal would be similar to the brooklyn promenande, with the BQE, Furman and Columbia streets directly under.  I lived right before moving to Harlem and it wasn't that bad nor did it stop people walking the promenade or just sitting out and taking in the view.

 

It hasn't stopped people from coming out to enjoy a day.

 

But you have to consider the butterfly effect you are setting off.  Those two garages are packed each and every day.  When you add in that they just took down one Justice Center parking garage, where do you expect those vehicles to park?  Follow through on the Seattle proposal and you can chalk up any dreams we have for the WHD lots.  I can guarantee you that.  Now... turning the top levels (and JUST the top levels) into green space is something worth considering.

I would be shocked if either Willard or Huntington are demoed.  Both are cash cows.  Plus, you take either of thos down and the WHD surface lots become that much more valuable.  They are both built into a hillside and put behind buildings you are going to build nothing up against.... and built between those buildings and the shoreway.  We need more garages like those two, not less.

 

Right! As much as I love the Seattle proposal, tearing down the garages for the grassy hill concept made zero sense. It's not like that would magically make the area some calm, pastoral setting with the railroad and shoreway right there. More infrastructure- not less- is the solution to connecting downtown to the lakefront.

 

I disagree.  To me that proposal would be similar to the brooklyn promenande, with the BQE, Furman and Columbia streets directly under.  I lived right before moving to Harlem and it wasn't that bad nor did it stop people walking the promenade or just sitting out and taking in the view.

 

It hasn't stopped people from coming out to enjoy a day.

 

But you have to consider the butterfly effect you are setting off.  Those two garages are packed each and every day.  When you add in that they just took down one Justice Center parking garage, where do you expect those vehicles to park?  Follow through on the Seattle proposal and you can chalk up any dreams we have for the WHD lots.  I can guarantee you that.  Now... turning the top levels (and JUST the top levels) into green space is something worth considering.

 

Agree!

 

Although i would like to see the WHD garages developed while demolishing the other garages. 

Devil's advocate:  What if a 515 Euclid type of parking garage was constructed in the WHD?  Where you had ground level retail, and the ability to expand upwards for office or residential.  Wouldn't that be better than what we have now?

If we had 515 style parking garages (assuming you mean with the option of additional floors built above for residential) w/retail on the first floor, then sure -- bring them onto the WHD.  But it's more likely that if the Garages on the north end of the mall go, any new parking garages would be cement chunks taking up the best blocks for future development.

 

But I would love to see some 515 style development ...really anywhere!

Well, all of it is a moot point.  The city gets too much revenue from the facilities to even consider giving them up.  I hope they address the step difference between Mall C and the garages, but I can't see them willing to destroy them, just to give parking business to a private entity.  (well if Forest City could benefit...never mind)

I agree.  Moot point.  Just one minor point of clarification.  I believe the County owns Huntington and the City owns Willard.

This would be an excellent topic for the Warehouse District thread! ;)

Lets look back at a MedMart rendering before LMN got involved. Thank you LMN.

Wow, that is atrocious. I've seen that picture before and I don't remember it being that ugly. LMN was a good choice.

Well it appears that the new design will eat up that whole lot in between st clair and "Hamilton" avenue. And it also will have nice street presence with no set back

 

http://media.cleveland.com/countyincrisis/photo/medical-mart-designjpg-73605da22bc3fb69.jpg

Not much new, but still interesting to read what those in the commercial property business nationally are reading (and seeing -- nice rendering!) about the MMCC project.....

 

Ground Broken on Cleveland Center

Development, Featured Content, Headlines, Top News of the Day

January 19, 2011

By Barbra Murray, Contributing Editor

 

With a ceremonial groundbreaking, work is officially underway on the Cleveland Medical Mart & Convention Center in Cleveland, Ohio. Developed on behalf of Cuyahoga County by Merchandise Mart Properties Inc., a division of Vornado Realty Trust, the $465 million project has already attracted commitments from a lengthy list of convention planners as well as businesses hoping to pre-lease space.

 

Crews are at the ready to lay the groundwork for the demolition of five buildings, abatement and other such preparation activities to make way for Cleveland MMCC. The development will encompass the 235,000 square-foot, four-story Medial Mart for the display of cutting-edge technology and products in the healthcare market, and will sit adjacent to the 230,000 square-foot Convention Center, which will include 90,000 square feet of dedicated meeting space and sit underneath the historic Cleveland malls.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cpexecutive.com/business-specialties/development/ground-broken-on-cleveland-medical-mart-convention-center/

Here's a little more analysis on the Med Mart tenant list:

 

http://www.medcitynews.com/2011/01/cleveland-medical-mart-tenants-a-breakdown-by-industry/

Just a slightly updated photo.

 

and while I'm at it.

Thanks!

Nashville's getting worried:

 

from Nashville Business Journal:

 

"More than a year after the Nashville Convention Center was heralded as the site for a new medical trade center, construction has yet to begin and developers have announced three tenants for the 1.5 million-square-foot project. With a prime piece of Broadway real estate on the line — and with construction under way on a competing, publicly financed project in Cleveland — many believe the city needs a Plan B...."

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/print-edition/2011/01/28/does-medical-mart-have-a-plan-b.html

 

How does the Nashville convention center have 1.5 million square feet @ a cost of only $250 million, whereas our project is 310000 sf and is costing $425 million...anyone?

How does the Nashville convention center have 1.5 million square feet @ a cost of only $250 million, whereas our project is 310000 sf and is costing $425 million...anyone?

 

It's doesn't matter, just like the rest of their "plan" nothing makes sense!

Unfortunately you have to be subscriber to the NBJ to read that whole article  :-(

Go Cleveland!

2.msg540546#msg540546 date=1296232667]

How does the Nashville convention center have 1.5 million square feet @ a cost of only $250 million, whereas our project is 310000 sf and is costing $425 million...anyone?

 

It's doesn't matter, just like the rest of their "plan" nothing makes sense!

 

Well It does make sense because ~$166 / sf is pretty standard..what makes our project cost so much?  Especially considering we are reusing an existing space and retrofitting it, this makes no sense to me.

$1.66 or $166? The Nashville math is $1.66. So I guess you could build a nice 3,000 sq ft home there for about 5 grand? :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

Nope 250m/1.5m = $166.xx

FYI, the Nashville medical trade center would be built out of their existing convention center, so a lot of it would involve retrofitting existing space (I assume).  Independently, Nashville is spending over $600M on a new convention center: http://nashvillemusiccitycenter.com/about/funding.asp.  All to say, their new med mart/convention center package will cost close to $900M.

Nope 250m/1.5m = $166.xx

 

My bad. Let me try this again. Cleveland comes to over $1,370 per sq ft. Even including the land acquisition costs that seems incredibly high.

Does that include the medical mart too?

Where is the 310,000 sq foot figure coming from?  According to the website the Mart will be 235,000 sq feet and the Convention Center is 230,000 for a total of 465,000.

^^Those numbers ($250M, 1.5M sf) are for just the med mart.  Unless you mean the Cleveland numbers (which you probably do).

 

In any case it's difficult to compare construction costs from one project to another considering the very different starting points and scale.

2.msg540546#msg540546 date=1296232667]

How does the Nashville convention center have 1.5 million square feet @ a cost of only $250 million, whereas our project is 310000 sf and is costing $425 million...anyone?

 

It's doesn't matter, just like the rest of their "plan" nothing makes sense!

 

Well It does make sense because ~$166 / sf is pretty standard..what makes our project cost so much?  Especially considering we are reusing an existing space and retrofitting it, this makes no sense to me.

 

Pretty standard for what kind of construction?

I think $166 per sq. ft. would work if you were building a Radio Shack or a fairly nice house.

Well It does make sense because ~$166 / sf is pretty standard..what makes our project cost so much?  Especially considering we are reusing an existing space and retrofitting it, this makes no sense to me.

 

We're not reusing any existing space, just an existing site for part of the project (though not all).  Nashville is using an existing site for their entire med mart and existing space.  I'm not saying our per sf costs are low (I have no idea), but it is very difficult to compare on that basis to what Nashville is doing. 

This website is pretty handy http://www.saylor.com/lacosts/.

Boston      $800MM  516,000sq ft

Chicago    $883MM  470,000sq ft (McCormick 2007 expansion)

 

 

 

 

We discussed this a few weeks ago.  The MMCC is slightly below average for comparable sized convention centers in country. 

Really.  Compared with other convention center construction around the country, $465 million is rather modest.  Chicago's west expansion alone to McCormick place is twice the cost and publicly funded.  It might be easier to ask you you to find comparable projects in the last 5-10 years with a cheaper price tag.

 

info i found on a few cc's:

 

pittsburgh cc - $373M - 330K sq ft - architect = vinoly

 

san diego cc - $752M expansion estimate - 750K sq ft

 

austin cc - $110M expansion - 246K sq ft - loosing approx $6M/yr

 

philadelphia cc - $700M expansion - 700K sq ft

 

denver cc - $310M - 584K sq ft

Punch, are you suggesting that we are going round and round discussing the same points time and time again.  Never on this board.  How dare you :-D

Thank you Punch!

 

Actually I forgot all about that discussion!

Nervous in Nashville??

 

What's Plan B for the Nashville Convention Center?

Slow progress on medical mart has some asking about alternative plans

Nashville Business Journal - by Eric Snyder , Staff Writer

Date: Friday, January 28, 2011, 5:00am CST - Last Modified: Friday, January 28, 2011, 9:57am CST

 

More than a year after the Nashville Convention Center was heralded as the site for a new medical trade center, construction has yet to begin and developers have announced three tenants for the 1.5 million-square-foot project.

 

With a prime piece of Broadway real estate on the line — and with construction under way on a competing, publicly financed project in Cleveland — many believe the city needs a Plan B.

 

It’s a concern for a host of business and community leaders, from downtown investors and members of Metro Council to the general manager of the Renaissance Hotel attached to the convention center — even though they believe the $250 million Nashville Medical Trade Center would provide a huge economic boost to downtown and the region if built.

 

READ MORE AT (REQUIRES SUBSCRIPTION):

http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/print-edition/2011/01/28/does-medical-mart-have-a-plan-b.html

^wasnt that already posted?

Yeah, but my version is all formatted up and pretty! :-D

It's worthy of a double post.

Pittsburgh is showing interest and concern with the new Medmart as well:

 

Cleveland to target medical meetings

 

Cleveland is betting big that a publicly financed convention center and ″medical mart″ will bring lucrative health care industry conventions to its downtown.

 

Pittsburgh is taking notice.

 

″It's a major portion of our business, and we'll do everything we can to protect it,″ said Joe McGrath, VisitPittsburgh president and CEO. ″But there haven't been discussions with the medical community or the meetings industry about creating a medical mart here.″

 

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_720387.html

Most showrooms have NO WINDOWS.  When the showrooms are designed, they are usually designed with fake windows since they need hard/flat wall surface for displaying their goods.

 

I would think the showrooms would be in the center of the building, without windows, and that the public spaces - lobbies, hallways - will go around the outside.  And that's what the windows will benefit.