January 30, 200916 yr We all need to chill the fuck out. It's really not a big deal .. why are we all getting so worked up about this? Have some respect for one another's opinions. We're all talking about hypothetical plans here, anyway. Sheesh!
January 30, 200916 yr Good for them. I won't go to any city north of I-70. I'm not alone. And the only city in that list with weather as bad as Cleveland's is Boston. I'm sorry my wimpyness offends you. But I didn't choose to be this way anymore than you chose to be tall, Latino or gay. I am sensitive to you. Be sensitive to me. Hold up. My comment wasn't to offend you nor is it personal. Yet to point out that those cities don't think about those things and yet they continue to attract conventions. Yes, we'll need to overhaul our convention infrasturature, (ie. hotels, cab services, dining service, etc.) but worrying about people walking in the weather is not a priority. Nor, IMHO, should it be. The hall/hall convention features and the level of conventions you attract should be the the priority. We all know that December to March is low season in the midwest and NE for conventions and is the cheapest time to visit those areas. Come Easter, those rates increase and rates in the South & West decrease.
January 30, 200916 yr Your response just shows how little you know about San Francisco weather and how brutal it can be. Outside of that I travel all over the world and like some people have stated in this thread, the most vibrant exciting urban enticing cities have horrible weather and they are not concerned or wasting their time with connecting their buildings with covered walk ways! You are just making Cleveland suburban and that notion is just nauseating. You all have to know that the younger generation do not care about this issue at all. We don't look at weather as a reason not to visit a city. We look at what is exciting and fun about a city and could give a rat's ass if they had covered walk ways so I didn't have to venture outside. This is one more reason Cleveland has issues getting things done, they can't see the forest through the trees and aren't willing to give us something for the good and long term benefit of the city. Montreal = urban metropolis = tons of underground passages. When you're finished traveling the world, I recommend you check it out some time. I suggest you limit yourself and live in Montreal
January 30, 200916 yr Geez , the only reason I brought the ped-way between PH and Crown up is because it's already there for the faint hearted and less adventurous.(connectivity to a hotel) If you have ever attended a convention you know what a blessing it is to get some fresh air outside and see some greenscape or a lakeshore or both;).
January 30, 200916 yr 3rd. And for the record, I respect everyone's opinon even when we don't agree. We're all entitled to our opinions and how this project should be built out. Bottom line - We all want the best facility that represent the best in and for Cleveland.
January 30, 200916 yr Man do things spin out of control pretty fast. I don't know if we need a formal time out- you never know when there will be actual new news on this topic. But the enclosed pedestrian/weather topic has definitely been beaten to death on this board, so I'm happy to move on...unless of course MMP proposes something specific.
January 30, 200916 yr Well with this beautiful weather, you can go running, biking, a little capture the flag.... haha, just being an ass.
January 30, 200916 yr Well with this beautiful weather, you can go running, biking, a little capture the flag.... haha, just being an ass. Only if you promise to wear you leisure suit!
January 31, 200916 yr I think that whichever site is chosen, any nearby hotels should be connected to the CC/MM. That's the standard for cities today. In general, Cleveland could do a number of things to make downtown more pedestrian friendly year-round (more taxis, arcades, public transit, etc.)
February 1, 200916 yr Chosen medical mart site offers second chance for Mall Posted by Steven Litt/Plain Dealer Architecture Critic January 31, 2009 19:37PM Cuyahoga County commissioners made a huge city planning decision 10 days ago when they chose to build the proposed medical mart and a new convention center on the downtown mall. They've also done a lousy job with the rollout. Since announcing their decision, they've withheld the detailed engineering and architectural analyses that explain why construction at the mall site would cost $108 million less than a competing site at Tower City Center. The silence has sent the galling message that while the commissioners had enough information to make a decision, they aren't willing yet to share the facts with the people paying most of the estimated $425 million for the project -- namely, taxpayers... more at: http://www.cleveland.com/medicalmart
February 1, 200916 yr MMPI's engineers are saying instead that the mall's surface may need to be raised, which would further alter Burnham's vision and make the space feel even more isolated and unsafe than it does. I think this objection could be easily overcome with a right architectural/ landscaping approach.
February 1, 200916 yr I really enjoyed that article, it's an interesting perspective that hasn't been talked about.
February 2, 200916 yr It's also a great time to reconnect with the vision of Burnham, who famously said, "Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood." I agree, 100%.
February 5, 200916 yr Scott Wolstein site on Flats east bank is second choice for medical mart Posted by Jim Nichols/Plain Dealer Reporter February 04, 2009 22:00PM Developer Scott Wolstein's plan for building a new Cleveland convention center and medical mart on the Flats' east bank has become the fallback site if the now-favored downtown mall location proves to be unworkable. The Flats site was a late addition to what had been a two-way contest to host the dual facility -- Wolstein proposed it publicly only last month. But it gained ground this week after the Moreland Hills developer traveled to Chicago to show his plans to Merchandise Mart Properties Inc., the company that will build and operate the facility. http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/02/scott_wolstein_site_on_flats_e.html
February 5, 200916 yr ^This whole thing makes the commissioners out to be a bunch of baboons. Why did they even say they "selected" a site. At the very least, say "we're leaning on the mall site, but it first needs to survive some tests." Also, I am still befuddled at how they did not do the freaking test before selecting??????
February 5, 200916 yr WTF??? Still better than TC. The boys at FCE/GCP are losing their grip and that's a good thing. This farce is one of the most remarkable I've seen since Gateway. Stunning.
February 5, 200916 yr seems more like they are angling for better deals on the privately owned land, while holding out for a bigger payout on the publicly owned land. it's early, does that make sense?
February 5, 200916 yr I like the fact that Forest City will have nobody to blame when TC isn't chosen.
February 5, 200916 yr seems more like they are angling for better deals on the privately owned land, while holding out for a bigger payout on the publicly owned land. it's early, does that make sense? It does to me.
February 5, 200916 yr Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"? Do you remember what use to be there and what Prospect use to look like before it was built?
February 5, 200916 yr I know. I don't understand why all these news outlets complain about Gateway. If they didn't build it they would be complaining about not having major league teams in Cleveland, E4th & the Huron/Prospect area wouldn't be developed, etc.
February 5, 200916 yr Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"? Crunch the numbers. It's a give-a-way. We were taken to the cleaners. Same with the stadium. Same with the Rock Hall. Same with the Science Center. The devil is in the details. The devil will be in the detail on this deal too. It's not what we do. It's HOW we do it.
February 5, 200916 yr Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"? Crunch the numbers. It's a give-a-way. We were taken to the cleaners. Same with the stadium. Same with the Rock Hall. Same with the Science Center. The devil is in the details. The devil will be in the detail on this deal too. It's not what we do. It's HOW we do it. Why don't you just tell us.
February 5, 200916 yr Guys, I've been told by some very reputable sources that the Medical Mart folks flat-out dislike having to deal with Forest City Enterprises. If FCE owned or influenced the Flats East Bank site instead of Wolstein, the Medical Mart wouldn't consider that site either. FCE has been a greater force pushing away the Medical Mart folks, not the assets/liabilities of a given site. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
February 5, 200916 yr Guys, I've been told by some very reputable sources that the Medical Mart folks flat-out dislike having to deal with Forest City Enterprises. If FCE owned or influenced the Flats East Bank site instead of Wolstein, the Medical Mart wouldn't consider that site either. FCE has been a greater force pushing away the Medical Mart folks, not the assets/liabilities of a given site. That's what I figured. Since the MM folks don't want to play in FCE sandbox, so FCE has decided to pickup the sand and sling mud.
February 5, 200916 yr I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.
February 5, 200916 yr I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally. While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf:
February 5, 200916 yr I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally. While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly. Correct!
February 5, 200916 yr I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally. While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly. I believe there is actually a public meeting scheduled for this next Thursday now.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can. And those revenue streams are?
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can. And those revenue streams are? More luxury suites, primarily. At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them. But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park. They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business.
February 5, 200916 yr I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally. While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly. I believe there is actually a public meeting scheduled for this next Thursday now. There is, yes.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can. And those revenue streams are? More luxury suites, primarily. At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them. But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park. They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business. Is there a market for them? Who says they are needed? There are plenty of luxury suites in the stadium, the question is who WANTS to buy them?
February 5, 200916 yr The market for luxury suites is certainly a valid question these days. The relative lack of them puts a cap on best-case revenues; it's a non-issue when the economy falls apart. My main point was about the land deal. The public tends to lose on these deals, sometimes in outrageous fashion, and details are never forthcoming. That's why I was hoping for a more open process on this thing. You'd think the controversy over the sales tax would have put them on notice.
February 5, 200916 yr I would have to imagine that jacobs field and the Q were some of the best things that have happened to our downtown area in the past 30-40 years. They are a source of pride, and everyone i talk to nationally thinks they are beautiful places to watch an event.
February 5, 200916 yr I would have to imagine that jacobs field and the Q were some of the best things that have happened to our downtown area in the past 30-40 years. They are a source of pride, and everyone i talk to nationally thinks they are beautiful places to watch an event. Absolutely, and I think the MM/CC will be too. Maybe not quite as much of a sure thing though. I'm not bringing this stuff up to argue against the project, I'm bringing it up in favor of a more open process. Paying too much for a good thing can really mitigate your benefit.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can. And those revenue streams are? More luxury suites, primarily. At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them. But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park. They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business. Actually jacobs field / progressive has more luxury suites than just about any park in baseball. People I know within the organization almost consider them a noose. They are extremely expensive and hard to move. That's why so many are empty. Most parks actually have fewer now. I think texas is the next closest to us, and we have significantly more... at any rate... Yes, we need to make sure we get a "good deal". At the same time, let's try not to let this thread turn into a disection of the gateway deal.
February 5, 200916 yr I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway. I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel. That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf: Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse. By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement. It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can. And those revenue streams are? More luxury suites, primarily. At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them. But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park. They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business. Actually jacobs field / progressive has more luxury suites than just about any park in baseball. People I know within the organization almost consider them a noose. They are extremely expensive and hard to move. That's why so many are empty. Most parks actually have fewer now. I think texas is the next closest to us, and we have significantly more... at any rate... Yes, we need to make sure we get a "good deal". At the same time, let's try not to let this thread turn into a disection of the gateway deal. I'm sorry, but the last word on luxury suites cannot be that they're not en vogue anymore. Anyone who knows anything about the economics of ticket sales knows that luxury suites are here to stay. http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/24/suites-sport-luxury-forbeslife-cx_ls_0325sports.html
February 5, 200916 yr if there will be any last wording it will be from a moderator. :) i never said luxury suites weren't here to stay. They are an absolutely necessary part of sport revenue. But to say our baseball park lacks them is folly. The indians have something like 92 or 93 suites. Currently the next closest team is Texas with somewhere around 60. I believe the new yankee park will have 65. They may be revenue generators but only if you can sell them all out, and unless you are in a market with a lot of businesses with a lot of money to burn they can be very hard to move. Most of the newer parks have between 40-50 suites. The indians have 90+, which as you might guess is too many... and many go unused. I got this directly from someone in their advertising and sales department. There's the last word. Back to medical marts and convention centers.
February 6, 200916 yr I attend several games every year in these suites and can tell from first hand experience that many last year went unsold. In fact, the Indians turned a couple into areas where we could grab and pay for food for those people staying in suites that were un-catered.
February 6, 200916 yr I found some recent articles that show I was wrong about the suites (not that I didn't believe you, McCleveland :-)). My point about the land lease came from a pretty reliable source though, and it seems relevant to this project. When it's a decision that affects everyone, everyone should at least be able to evaluate it. Not just the county's crack team. That way we can all make an informed decision how to vote next time.
February 6, 200916 yr Cuyahoga County commissioners to hold hearing on medical mart Posted by Jim Nichols/Plain Dealer Reporter February 04, 2009 21:55PM Next Thursday, taxpayers finally will get the answers they've been waiting for about why Cuyahoga County commissioners want to build a convention center and medical mart on the downtown Cleveland mall. The Cleveland City Council will hold a hearing Thursday in which Medical Mart Properties Inc., the county's partner in the project, will explain why it prefers the mall site over any other. The decision has raised a lot of questions, some of which have answers and some of which don't. Here's a breakdown on where we stand:... http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/02/cuyahoga_county_commissioners_3.html
February 6, 200916 yr Glad they're having a meeting. I hope they post the reports somewhere. Those arguments about TC being enclosed are good ones. But they want us to trade restoration and new development for some winter conventions. It doesn't sound like a great tradeoff. How is that disasterous if it's only in the winter? Conventions here in this weather will be rare regardless of the site. They do this for a living. I wouldn't expect many bookings at TC when they could put people somewhere else where outside isn't an issue. They weren't talking about either site vs Las Vegas or Miami right now. Also no mention of the new train station, linking the mall site with the lake. I hope that's being considered part of the overall plan. Then the mall is also linked indoors via train to TC, and the flats, and the airport. Everybody gets everything they want.
Create an account or sign in to comment