The best location is still next to Tower City for the Convention Center, I think.  That's the urban core.  Build from the center out.  Density is the key...then, you have a nice piece of land for a bunch of developers to take a whack at proposing what to do with it.  Just my take.

But then what do we do with an empty convention center, and empty county administration building, and an empty Public Auditorium?  It seems to me that if we can replace the old convention center with a new one on the same site, it will make it easier to find uses for those other two spaces, because they can be complementary uses to the convention center.  With the Tower City site, we will end up with a huge amount of empty facility in the middle of downtown that won't be easy to find new uses for.

 

Also, I think the Tower City Convention Center will make for a hideous western face for Downtown.  Think about it- truck loading docks and ramping 150 feet in the air?  It will overwhelm the "Riverfront Park" they are proposing as well, and require a whole lot of road reconfiguration, ramping, and possibly road widening right by the main highway entrance to downtown.  I think it will be a traffic mess.  Combined with the possible Northern Alignment for the Innerbelt reconstruction that section of downtown will be a concrete nightmare.

I can't disagree with your 2nd point...extremely valid. 

The old site-housing, housing, and more housing!

How are you going to convert the Public Auditorium and the Convention Center to housing?

I can't disagree with your 2nd point...extremely valid. 

The old site-housing, housing, and more housing!

 

How do you convert something that is a national landmark into housing???  The malls, convention center, PHall/MHall, the library, courthouse & Board of Ed are all landmarks.  :?

Saturday, February 25, 2006

 

CLEVELAND

 

Convention center report online

 

The groups that were the hosts of a symposium about the future of convention centers last October in Cleveland have published a report on their findings. The Convention & Visitors Bureau of Greater Cleveland and the Convention Facilities Authority - the group charged with recommending a location and financing plan for a new downtown center - worked with The International Association for Exhibition Management to organize the event. Panel members discussed ways to design, build and use exhibit halls of the future. To read the report, go to: www.iaem.org/content/WhitePaperResearchSymposium20060222.pdf.

This was on my Cox-Cleveland home page today....

 

Convention Authority Loses Money     

04-19-2006 8:52 AM

 

(Cleveland, OH) -- The group charged with finding a site and financing for a new convention center in Cleveland will have less money to work with. The Cuyahoga County Commissioners have slashed the Convention Facilities Authority budget to eight-thousand-dollars a month. The cuts follow the authority's suspension of operations earlier this year. The county commissioners will send the remaining 25-thousand-dollar monthly payouts to the Convention and Visitors Bureau of Greater Cleveland.

 

Copyright 2006 Metro Networks Communications Inc., A Westwood One Company

Just wondering.....

 

If a casino was approved for Tower City, would FCE propose building the convention center on Scranton penninsula, and bridge the river to a convention center hotel and casino complex on the terminal tower side of the river.

 

Just one of the random thoughts that go through my head

Your explanation looks pretty accurate.  I've seen layouts of the convention center plan at my place of employment and it willl be casino, convention center, parking, hotel, etc on the Terminal side.  The aesthetics are attrocious with the center hulking over the river and a huge truck delivery ramp going to the 6th floor of the center on the river side.  Sounds incredible/horrible/inefficient, but it is true.

I haven't seen renderings of the Scranton Penninsula developement however.  I'm assuming Forest City will wait until teh last possible minute to build on that land.  Remember what Forest City has said in the past, "we don't create demand, we react to it."

Thankfully Robert Stark does not see it that way.  I really think FC will miss the boat on this city.

Remember what Forest City has said in the past, "we don't create demand, we react to it."

 

Ah, the developer's rallying cry following World War II, when returning GIs created a suburban housing market and institutionalized urban sprawl for the next 60+ years.

 

Thankfully Robert Stark does not see it that way.  I really think FC will miss the boat on this city.

 

I agree. I think they're already falling behind, and it's their own hometown. One of these days, they're going to try to step out from behind the other developers and say "Here we are with a nice big project...who's going to give us a big hug? Anyone? Anyone? Hello! We're frickin' Forest City over he'e!"

Sure sounds like the mall site is not being considered.

i bet this medical mart will be an extra selling point to pick forest city's proposal.  granted if we got a 500,000 sq ft medical mart with this convention center i would not mind the FC site.  i bet the whole thing would have to be redesigned as well.

Since the election campaigns of Jackson and Hagan were funded heavily by Forest City, guess where their convention center conversations will be steered. And, who is going to negotiate a tentative deal with Merchandise Mart Properties Inc. for the existing convention center? No one is in a position to do so. However, Forest City is able to do so for their own properties around Tower City.

 

If the casino gambling issue passes this fall, then they will be one step closer to a funding source for building the convention center. As noted in the Crain's article....

 

Both Mr. Dimora and Mr. Hagan say no decision will be made until the end of the year about how to pursue a new convention center. Once the dust has settled from the November election, they will have a better idea of how to move forward.

I've gotta admit that this is the first time that I've actually considered the Forest City site to be an option.  Maybe it's the amount of time that has passed since the discussion was last heated up or maybe it's the possibility of really beefing up this part of Downtown and perhaps making the jump to Scranton Peninsula.  But seriously, what happened to the Mall discussion?  Last I remember, the Medical Mart fit into that plan as well...

 

“We’re going to make a decision after the election and before the first of the year,”

 

I'm marking your words, Mr. Hagan!

 

 

How are they going to fit an additional 500,000 sq ft building onto that tiny wedge of land?  It won't exactly be a skyscraper.  If anything, the Medical Mart makes the Mall site make even more sense.  The convention center could go out over the tracks, with the hotel along East 9th above the tracks, the Medical Mart could stand where the county offices currently stand.  If the CC/Medical Mart goes at TC, what are they going to do with the 1/2 of the Mall that they will be leaving vacant?

 

I really, really, am not liking the direction this town is starting to go with its major public investments.

I agree 100 percent!

 

If the convention center and medical mart are built at the Tower City site, we will have:

 

> a vacant, former convention center

> a very underutilized Public Hall

> a continued disconnect between the lakefront and downtown

> a very underutilized Cleveland Browns Stadium

Plus:

> a Cuyahoga County Administration building that's soon to become vacant

> and a Public Square in need of redesign

 

Anyone in the city's leadership see how all these line up -- including leading right toward Tower City Center? ? ?

 

This is where Corporate Cleveland seems to have sacrificed reason, sound urban planning and community benefit for the gain of a few. I realize that's how this country is going, but is that how this city has to go? Sad thing is, is Forest City really hurt by expanding the existing convention center, linked to Tower City via attractive all-weather pedestrian linkages?

 

Add vision to the things sacrificed in this process.

Luckily FC and their architects can't add more land to Scranton Peninsula or this might be more doable.  For the Merch Mart to be successful it will need to be of better access to Euclid Ave and University Circle.  Hiding behind TC and below downtown Cleveland in the industrial guts isn't exactly accessible nor synergistic, to use an old 90s word.  If FC can get the pols to do their bidding for them it will be so overtly obvious that they are bought.  Probably why Hagan wants to know which way the wind is blowing come November. 

Every meeting I went to and every academic discussion I've had over the past year on this topic have all either flat out stated or blatantly implied that the FC site is the lesser, if not a poor, site.  The only way I could see this fitting in back there is if it involved development across the river.  How that could happen, I don't know.  But I agree that the current location and possible available land along the Mall is more sensible and suitable for this project. 

 

Either one can be used to "jump" a gap...whether it be the railroad tracks to the lakefront or the river to Scranton... but which one is more likely to happen?  Which has more of the public benefit in mind?  Which one creates the convention center we want and makes our Downtown more complete at the same time?  I have no doubt in my mind at this point that it's the Mall site.  The master plans from the 90s all had that as the plan...so there was will behind it back then.  But what now?  Jackson has never come out one way or another.  Has the political support shifted? 

Campbell used the spector of the convention center going to Tower City in the last days of the campaign, saying that Jackson had more or less promised it to the Ratners.

 

Lots of things are said in campaigns, though.

 

So the Medical Mart is a year round display area for medical merchandise, sort of like the furniture department of a department store.  Too bad Forest City does not have an empty department store sitting on its property that could be easily linked to a new convention center, say at the the southeast corner.....

Every meeting I went to and every academic discussion I've had over the past year on this topic have all either flat out stated or blatantly implied that the FC site is the lesser, if not a poor, site.  The only way I could see this fitting in back there is if it involved development across the river.  How that could happen, I don't know. 

 

SP is one of 5 sites being considered right now for a major new year-round cultural attraction. As is the Norfolk-Southern site by the innerbelt and the properties around the soon to be demoed Independent Towel Company. (stay tuned)

 

If this proposal pans out, then having the convention/mart at FC may be beneficial for everyone in the immediate area. This will not bode well for the lakefront in terms of touristy things, but will still keep the area more residentially friendly.

 

Of course, it still leaves to question what will become of the old CC.

 

What?  A major new year-round cultural attraction that needs a huge amount of land?  What are ou getting at here Musky? 

This new info raises a lot of questions in my mind. I can't say that I feel one way or another about the location.

 

I wonder if the convention center board is still active. I believe that the mayor and the county commissioners each selected members. They are the group charged with looking over the plans and making a final decision.  When some of us last heard from them, it seemed as if the Mall site was the no-brainer.  That was before the medical mart came into play. How important is a medical mart? How much does that mean to Cleveland economically? Would they build one next to the mall site? at the "old" county hq? 

 

the mall site would do a lot for the average clevelander who does not use the convention center.  would the tower city site make more business sense?  it has direct transit access via the airport, two hotels, a large arena, movies, a casino? and shopping.  if i were from out of town and looking for a place to hold my convention, i would prefer the tower city site.

^That's a good thought. Tower City is already a city unto itself. A modern convention center would only add to that and would be extremely convienent for conventioneers. Are they planning another hotel with a new center if its built at Tower City?

 

What if the current convention center were turned into a fill fledge sound stage for movies shot here like it was for "Spider man?"

 

^that, to me, would seem to be a waste of valuable Downtown real estate. 

 

Just throwing out some ideas here:

 

Say we have an empty convention center... what if we redeveloped it as a mega residential amenity with fitness center, movie theaters and live performance spaces, community meeting spaces, and so on...unparallelled in the region...to really anchor Downtown as a residential neighborhood.  In conjunction with that, we'd have to develop the County's current location as high rise housing and really focus on building more dense residential blocks east of Erieview and north of the RR tracks.

 

That, or we could listen to what FC has planned for it.  Didn't they mention that they'd been discussing possible future uses for it and sounded pretty optimistic about its future?  I'm sure it's somewhere in here... 

^If it was fully utilized I don't see how it would be a waste of downtown real estate. We already have movie theatres downtown and we have live performance spaces unparallelled in the region in House of Blues and Play House Square center. I don't see how adding another complex with such features would help downtown anymore than whats already there.

I'll go back to my suggestion that the existing convention center site be converted into a variant of Toronto's PATH .... http://www.toronto.ca/path/

 

I know there are those who believe it would cause too much loss of pedestrian activity from downtown. But I do like the ideas of putting amenities in there for downtown (and near downtown) residents. Many Cleveland neighborhoods have recreation centers. Why shouldn't downtown? What are some other amenities that downtown residents want and don't yet have, but would be appropriate for the existing convention center?

I am certainly not Forest City's biggest fan, but I have to admit, I think it's probably the better of the two sites. The direct link to the airport is huge. So is having an existing (albeit currently struggling) infrastructure for retail. And, despite being located on the "backside" of the Tower City complex, I think it's proximity to Euclid, Public Square, Warehouse District/Starkville and E. 4th are all reasonable, certainly as reasonable as on Mall B. Plus, while I don't want to reward Forest City's hardballing tactics, the Huron Rd. site surely would make development of Scranton Peninsula and pedestrian connectors more palatable to them.

 

Meanwhile, from what I've seen of the initial schematics, it looks like the Mall B site would remain largely underground and i invisible to Joe Blow. In addition, the conversion of the existing site could certainly interrupt convention service for a while, destroying relationships with those organizations we are fortunate enough to currently draw to Cleveland. The large amount of vacancy that would show up via the County admin move and the Convention and Visitors move I think presents us with an opportunity for redeveloping the Civic District with better connections to both the Warehouse and Avenue districts. Again, I don't think that this has been a fair and transparent process, and I certainly don't like Forest City's approach throughout this whole submission, rescind, submission process. But I do think that looking at it objectively, the FC site is far and away a better fit for a Convention Center.

"The large amount of vacancy that would show up via the County admin move and the Convention and Visitors move I think presents us with an opportunity for redeveloping the Civic District with better connections to both the Warehouse and Avenue districts"

 

I have to respectfully disagree with you. Most of the Civic Center district is comprised of open space, specifically the Malls. There is no chance in hell that anything will ever be developed on those sites (except for the former County Admin/113 St.Clair block). The entire area is a National Historic Register site with protected sightlines, etc. Where would anything be developed? All of the buildings (again save for the northwest section) have Landmark status and won't be going anywhere anytime soon. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting you but when you say "redevelop" the district - that says construction. Well, there aren't many places in that area that would be eligible.

 

Here is a visual reference - I've labeled all of the "untouchables" in red - see what I mean by the only site that's "developable"?

What are some other amenities that downtown residents want and don't yet have, but would be appropriate for the existing convention center?

 

Stores! ;)

 

No, actually I wouldn't want another indoor shopping mall downtown. Yucko. But I think retail is the biggest amenity currently lacking from downtown. Maybe Stark will fix that.

As for the convention center/hall, I like the rec center idea. The only problem I see with that is that many of the apartment buildings downtown have their own gyms -- so the rec center would have to be something really spectacular to lure people out of their buildings.

Showing my ignorance....but if there is to be another convention center built...then why is the old one "untouchable"?  I understand of protecting historic buildings, that is prime downtown property that could be developed into something rather than sit as an abandoned building.  Obviously the other "untouchables" are in use and that status is fine for them(except that I think the BOE uses WAY to much land for the building that sits on it).  I know many people on here will emphatically disagree with me on this, but to me, the archaic convention center is a behemoth that is underused and takes up prime space! (sorta like the Browns stadium...even though I am an avid football fan!)  Is there a way that that building could be incorporated into a project that could  turn it into more vertical space?  Does the term "untouchable" mean COMPLETELY?  Just curious.....

^^Maybe a mega grocery store!

Are you saying that we should tear down Public Hall??

 

:shoot: JDD941

Sorry. I was a little vague on that one (although I think new construction on the block between Ontario and Franz Pastorius would be ideal). I certainly didn't mean that the historically designated buildings should go or that the green space should be invaded in any way . I do, however, think that a lot could be done to create a sense of continuity between the adjacent residential districts and the Civic district through signage, lighting, etc. I also think that, as was mentioned earlier in the thread, you could certainly draw tenants into the existing Convention Center space in a creative re-use project. While it might not be a good use of space to convert the entire space into a film studio space, there are certainly a lot of local businesses that could benefit from being in the same physical location as a film studio. That could be the cornerstone of reusing the space, without devoting the entire building to that activity. My main point was that use of the space as a convention center was not necessarily the best reuse of the district, given its general dirge of retail, proximity to trains, low visibility, etc.

The "new" convention center across the malls is expected to have rail access via WFL from what I recall. 

I'm not an expert, but I think the Tower City idea is the most attractive from a convention POV because it's on the Rapid and just a zip away from Hopkins. My pops is a corporate type (I'm sorta corporate, but I don't leave my cubicle, haha), and he's been to a million different, cool cities. I ask him, what was Seattle like? "It was sunny the day we were there." What was Denver like? "I don't remember. Jamie, I don't have a chance to explore."

 

At the same time, I have a hard time imagining a bunch of bigwigs in some association sitting together at their annual meeting in Washington D.C. or San Francisco, etc., and saying "Next year, let's do this in Cleveland!" You can put the convention on the Red Line or in Stow, and I just don't see the demand. Can't we work on making the city better for the people who live here and then focus on that sort of stuff? If the kitchen isn't finished, why are we inviting people to lunch?

Here are some programs, services and facilities offered by recreation centers throughout the country (courtesy of a quick search of Google)...

 

Facilities:

full-size gymnasium

meeting/dance room

exercise room

game room

neighborhood swiming pool

tennis/volleyball courts

basketball courts

softball fields, batting cages

running track

bicycle course

skate park

obstacle course

climbing wall

bowling alley

neighborhood gardens

 

Programming:

arts and crafts

athletic leagues (volleyball, basketball, bowling, tennis etc)

cultural programs

special events and festivals

daycare, daycamp and afterschool

teen clubs

adventure clubs

cycling team

video production

internet surfing/web design

gardening instruction

boxing

wrestling

ceramics

dance classes

 

Services:

concession stands

security stations

basic health care/screenings

safezone

information stations for tourists, business travelers, and citizens seeking local government services

 

Now, tell me, if we had all or many of these, downtown would not be THE place to live and visit! Many of these services could be contracted out to private business (athletic facilities, concessions, etc.) while other services (daycamp, day care, health screening etc) could be operated as satellite operations of local, regional, state and federal governments. Call it a one-stop shopping location for a little bit of everything otherwise available at scattered sites throughout Cuyahoga County.

The Moscone Center in San Francisco ( http://www.moscone.com/site/do/index has done a remarkable job of creating a world class convention center and a community center.

 

The have day care, bowling, a carousel, plus many of the programming features mentioned by KJP. Don't see why we can't do the same. I know it wastalked about a lot when discussion of a new CC began about two years ago. I know because I was interning at city hall in the planning dept. and one of my projects was to research convention centers across the country (with help from fellow undergrad student at Levin).

Actually, I like the idea of a grocery store, JDD.  That maybe one of the few opportunities to get a Giant Eagle or Heinen's sized grocery downtown.  But I still would prefer not having the TC monstronsity.

 

And really, how far is the current CC from the rapid?  A five minute walk.

Wimwar...call off that machine gun guy...it's starting to hurt!!!  I MEANT..can there be a project to ADD-ON to the current building in a vertical manor(like 515 Euclid parking garage hopefully)...like hotel, office space, BOTH...and use the current ground level, below ground for other things....

I second the gunner. JDD, are you not familiar with the group plan?

Yeah it is a five minute walk, but you'll probobly only get 5 people from a convention to walk there. You got lazy people as well as out of towners that don't know their way around.

^^..No, I am not familiar..just stating concern for an empty building in downtown IF the convention center went elsewhere......did I say anything about tearing it down?  I thought I mentioned something to the affect of additions and what "untouchable" meant....but thats okay....I'll keep wearing my Kevlar!

OK, well then, I promise my gun will only shoot blanks....wait, well never mind.

 

Here is a presentation from the Cleveland Restoration Society, that puts the group plan and the Convention center into context.

 

http://www.clevelandrestoration.org/GroupPlanPresentation.pdf

 

The Group Plan is the most overrated public space in the city.  Other than the fountain at Mall A, the space is extremely uninviting, completely out of the human scale (the only building that deals with the giant scale of it is Key Tower, at 948'), is empty 99% of the time, and it's only views are of the Browns Stadium and the terribly proportioned Great Lakes Science Center.  I say build buildings on it if it makes sense for the city to be successful.

Granted, it's a five-minute walk, but if I attend a convention in Cleveland during the late fall or early spring (or, God forbid for all those poor Sun Belters, winter), I think the average conventioneer would like to ride escalators up to their room, rather than dragging wheeled luggage through Public Square and then into the gusts that rip through the malls. Or grab a cab for a four-block trip. Believe me, I'm all for giving people the opportunity to explore the city, but I still think that a convention site should not only be picturesque but should also afford as much convenience and comfort to visitors as possible.

I think the Group Plan, including the malls, are a terrific urban space. Apparently a lot of downtown workers think so too at lunch time. You'd have to be blind not to see them. Did that 99 percent figure come from someplace, or did you just pull it out of your behind?

 

If there's something wrong with the Group Plan, it's that the surrounding uses tend to be active only from 9-5 weekdays. There needs to be more housing and more events hosted on the malls (Movie on the Mall is a good start!). But that's not a failure of design of the malls itself, but a failure of imagination on behalf of the city and the people within it.

You are way off base there, 8 SoG.

I take my kids there all of the time. They love the views, the buildings, the trees. We have lunch there some times, too.

 

 

Does it need improvement? Yes, absolutely.

I think groups like Parkworks are doing a great service by creating more programing there.

Have you been to any of the Meet me on the Mall events this year yet?

 

http://www.parkworks.org/images/MMOTM%20Plain%20Text%20Schedule3.pdf

 

 

I love Strawbridge Park (is that called Mall C??). It has awesome views of the lake, the new wind turbine, etc.  Also, the grass is very comfortable to sit on.  With the ParkWorks bocce balls, croquet and badminton sets all available at the convention center's main desk, the park is becoming even more user-friendly. 

I've seen people use Mall for everything from bocce to football:

 

 

 

The Group Plan is the most overrated public space in the city.  Other than the fountain at Mall A, the space is extremely uninviting, completely out of the human scale (the only building that deals with the giant scale of it is Key Tower, at 948'), is empty 99% of the time, and it's only views are of the Browns Stadium and the terribly proportioned Great Lakes Science Center.  I say build buildings on it if it makes sense for the city to be successful.

 

I wholeheartedly agree.  I'm thrilled programming and redesigns have led to more use, but the mall is a barren wasteland for much of the year (November through March) and an underused, over-sized airstrip the rest.  I suppose I forgive Burnham et al for the design given the then expectations for total population and population density but even back then some of the other competition entries, IMHO, were sharper and would have survived the ages better.  Not that several of the buildings aren't individually swell.

 

That deserted Mall (and Euclid for that matter) makes Downtown frequently remind me of Night the Comet (that movie where a comet turns everyone to dust so all the city is deserted except for a few zombies and a few lucky souls who survived because they happened to be shielded by metal when the comet came, like the girl who slept in a Dumpster...but I digress).