Cleveland: Global Center for Health Innovation & Convention Center

[KJP]

I did; update me, please. ... I used to subscribe to Crain's b/c I liked their pro-downtown growth angle... But it seemed, esp during Jane Campbell's term, to really drift too far to the right in editorials and seemed more political than urban growth, so I dropped it. It's a good local urban mag, but annoying at times.

 

They had a very pro transit editorial in it.

[Clvlndr in LV]

I also applaud the Crain's editorial (thanks for posting KJP). The comments made about the WFL did come across as a little negative but as X mentioned they were not entirely innaccurate.

 

Clvlndr you seem to suggest that this editorial by Crain's is self serving but I'm not sure from your comments what Crain's has to gain by the county choosing the mall site.

 

Pete that is an excellent point about parking revenues.

[X]

Point 1- I agree with you on transit, I disagree that one paragraph in an editorial means that Crain's is forevermore opposed to all rail transit.  That's a pretty big overreaction to pretty scant evidence.

 

Point 2- Make your point concisely, and perhaps I won't miss it inside a dense and convoluted rant. At any rate, I think I did address your point, and fairly.  Certainly some conventioneers will want to get out and explore, but we are really doing all in our power to let them not do so- ask your shrinks about "paths of least resistance".  The issue of proximity to Gateway and the Warehouse District has already been settled, several times.  I'm not getting into that again.

 

Point 3- "Innovative and aggressive" is nice to say.  Now where's the plan?  How much will it cost?  Who pays?

 

Point 4- Isn't this in essence point 2 restated?

[clvlndr]

if people had gotten off their asses and really supported a downtown subway up Euclid

 

if people had gotten off their asses and really supported a downtown subway up Euclid

 

if people had gotten off their asses and really supported a downtown subway up Euclid

 

if people had gotten off their asses and really supported a downtown subway up Euclid

 

Oh for cryin' out loud already :roll:

 

... give me your club MayDay, so I can beat it ONE MORE TIME...

[clvlndr]

I did; update me, please. ... I used to subscribe to Crain's b/c I liked their pro-downtown growth angle... But it seemed, esp during Jane Campbell's term, to really drift too far to the right in editorials and seemed more political than urban growth, so I dropped it. It's a good local urban mag, but annoying at times.

 

They had a very pro transit editorial in it.

 

Really? ... would love to see it.  I've gotten the sense they are excactly the opposite given some of their past stances...

[cle2032]

Ok, so clvndr may have repeated some things, paraphrased/editorialized some thoughts, used rhetoric but if we really look at what he/she is trying to say, I think he/she has some very valid points.

 

Point 1.  If anyone in the PD dared to mention the wasteful nature of the WFL, we would have built a guillotine on the southwest quadrant of Public Square.  It's not wasted $$$, it's wasted opportunities by those few, privelaged individuals capable of instantly provoking some sort of change in the city.  Unless they think a meandering, narrow apartment complex could have occupied the WFL rails, a "better use" for land is as rhetorical as the "aggressive and innovative" attitude towards reprogramming the current CC for which clvndr was criticized unfairly.

 

Point 2.  Yeah, conceivably one could never step foot outside in Cleveland-unless their gate at CLE doesn't have a jetway.  Let's be fair and demand hard facts for the way in which a convention center-with the coveted MEDICAL MART-located in a major downtown, accessible to/from an intl'l airport via rapid transit spells the demise for a city with an envied dining scene, up and coming retail tenants, world renown cultural and recreational institutions and attractions...Are there any?

 

We're assuming that the vast majority of people-a majority in which the minority will have no effect on the growth/economic development of downtown CLE-will choose remain inside the TC complex-whether it's a one day conference or 1 week conference. 

 

We're assuming that the shopping amenities will suffice in that there will be no need for other options on downtown's streets.  Yes ,that means that I will NEVER be able to shop along Euclid or in the WHD unless I want a pair of jeans with a dragon on the @ss or a rhinestone encrusted pimp chalice. 

 

We're assuming that we won't market all of the things Cleveland/NEO has to offer and that anything conventioneers used to do in CLE, such an influx of visitors will actually hurt our city instead of extending our network throughout the US/World--that's the benefits-long term and/or short term-of thousands of additional people spending time in Cleveland with Clevelanders.

 

We're also assuming that any progress we've seen regarding downtown development will stop.  If we're so stubborn/naive to think that a MM in the wrong place is worse than our "inadequate" convention center without a MM, than our momentum as a city/region in reclaiming the city center should be independent of any outside or BONUS forces such as conventions and more tourists.

 

3.  Come on Clvndr, where are you renderings, site plans, hard numbers?  :roll:  Who on this website has room to talk about posing rhetorical/theoretical/ideological questions/statements with solid, physical material backing up his/her idea?  Yes, if/when the current convention center is vacated, we need "make lemonade from our lemons"!  Let's see, we've brainstormed about that before--aquarium, natatorium, Guggenheim-CLE, Louvre-CLE, IKEA, multimodal station, movie-production spaces...We could go on and on to the point of redundant/irrelevant jibberish-hey, I'm probably approaching that point right now...

 

"Innovative and aggressive"  Yes those are cute, poweful words.  Let's leave it at that and not demand some thesis from clvndr for hoping we-as UOers or NEOers-take full advantage of reprogramming one of America's most under-appreciated and least utilized civic spaces.

 

Again, I'm all for keeping the convention center where it is and redeveloping the Group Plan.  I think it's the best solution that offers the most potential for the city of Cleveland to grow.  But, if the TC site is inevitable, why not try to look at the bright side of things?  What do we stand to gain?  What spin-off development opportunities may happen?  Hell, conventions in Cleveland during Dec-Mar may be more appealling with the TC site.  I think that "off-season" tourists to Cleveland will be a good thing-regardless.  With everything else happening in the city, I'd like to think all of the non-MM/CC visitors will brings lots of good fortune to the city as the many CC/MM independent projects (FEB, WHD, Ave, Healthline, PHS) and world-class UC will attracts more and more tourists each year.

[Hts121]

Do we even know where the hotel will go or whether a convention sized hotel will even be built?

 

Isn't that important to know before we start labeling this project as a street killer (outside of consequences any given CC may have on street life)?

 

If the conventioners are going to be regularly traveling between the CC and Indigo, One, Marriot, Holiday Inn, Hilton, etc, I would think that would benefit street life plenty.

 

Now, if they build some monstrosity (sp?) as part of some mega complex with the CC and TC (as we saw in the previous rendering), I can see people's point.... but I would STILL think this is a good thing.

[Clvlndr in LV]

I also agree with Clvlndr.  I think the TC site could yield a very unique and effective CC in Cleveland.  I'm really looking forward to the renderings of this facility.  As long as it's done right it could really be something special.

 

As for Public Hall going to waste I don't think this would be the case.  Would this building not be the perfect fit for a museum similar to the Field Museum in Chicago?  I'm not really familiar with the way museums are created/moved... but how difficult would it be to create a museum at the site or move one there?  What are the options if any?

 

I'm sure we would all like to see some renderings, but I fear that it will take an architectural miracle to become unique, effective, or something special. This is especially true considering they are already over budget. Perhaps if there was a new master plan for what could be built over the cc in the future, and a commitment from FCE to implement such a plan, I would be more enthusiastic about the TC site.

 

The museum idea is interesting but don't you prefer to have our collection of museums stay in University Circle?

 

 

[X]

3. I don't want renderings, site plans, or hard numbers from Clvndr.  I want them from the Convention Authority that is saying that we are saving money by going with a different site.  That should be a part of the planning process.  Instead they've put on blinders to the larger planning issues that the TC site raises in order to make the argument for that site.  And yes, I do think that is intentional on their part.

[Confiteordeo]

The museum idea is interesting but don't you prefer to have our collection of museums stay in University Circle?

 

We have multiple museums downtown already- the Rock Hall and the Science Center to start, plus the Mather and USS Cod (and arguably the inside of the Soldiers and Sailors monument.)  One reason I saw on this board for supporting the current CC location was improving the connection betweent North Coast Harbor and the rest of downtown.  Since the RRHOF and GLSC aren't going anywhere, at least for the foreseeable future, a museum in the current CC/Public Hall space might be an interesting way to increase people flow from Public Square, through the civic district of city hall/the justice center/the federal building, and down to NCH.  I see it more as an expansion of the existing downtown museum district than as a detriment to the one in University Circle.

[RyanScav]

i would just like to say that if you think that this development will "kill" street life then you are mistaken. Having this CC downtown will increase street life GREATLY. this thing isnt only going to be used for medical shows.. there are many more uses to a convention center. given that, then we know that locals will be using this space too. from that we can understand that more than just out-of-town, stay-for-2-days, never-see-the-light-of-day conventioneers are going to be downtown. this thing will attract all kinds of people from all kinds of places. giving it the connection to tower city, if you ask me, is simply a plus. now they have no choice but to discover tower city. however, if they want anything other than whats available at tower city, then they are in excellent position to discover everything that downtown cleveland has to offer.

 

basically.. we need to know what/who the average conventioneer is going to be.

 

someone in the medical field who is here for 2 days?

a random teen from youngstown who is going to the anime convention?

what about the local workers, and local participants in these conventions?

 

just some quick thoughts.

 

 

[gotribe]

Several other cities in the past ten years have built convention centers.  If they were not additions, what did they use their old one for?  I have not really seen that on this discussion yet.

[KJP]

i would just like to say that if you think that this development will "kill" street life then you are mistaken. Having this CC downtown will increase street life GREATLY.

 

Scav, You seem to be stating this as a fact but yet you don't provide any examples from other cities, local surveys or other data. In the absence of such data, this is an opinion. Thus the only "mistaken" person here is you for believing we all should share your opinion.

[Barneyboy]

Several other cities in the past ten years have built convention centers.  If they were not additions, what did they use their old one for?  I have not really seen that on this discussion yet.

Keep in mind that few cities built their convention centers as early as Cleveland's, or in such a monumental style, nor within the context of a comprehensive civic center/planned urban district.

Convention centers are easily disposed of when they don't age well. With a few obvious exceptions, ours has!

[gotribe]

Several other cities in the past ten years have built convention centers. If they were not additions, what did they use their old one for? I have not really seen that on this discussion yet.

Keep in mind that few cities built their convention centers as early as Cleveland's, or in such a monumental style, nor within the context of a comprehensive civic center/planned urban district!

 

I'm not trying to be cocky, but serious.  Not saying I approve of this or not.  Just trying to see what our options are for the current center.  Can it somehow be incorporated into a new county building, museum...velodrome HA HA.

[clvlndr]

i would just like to say that if you think that this development will "kill" street life then you are mistaken. Having this CC downtown will increase street life GREATLY.

 

Scav, You seem to be stating this as a fact but yet you don't provide any examples from other cities, local surveys or other data. In the absence of such data, this is an opinion. Thus the only "mistaken" person here is you for believing we all should share your opinion.

 

Indianapolis.

[CH Jake]

The Indianapolis city center mall is in the center of the city -- and actually extends over and across a main intersection.  It's like a spider that is visible from many places in a wide downtown area that has spurred activity along each of its arms. 

 

Tower City, on the other hand is hidden away from the street in a corner of downtown where its expansion and off-shoot development is basically zero on the river side (Huron).  So we're left with spurring development in that triangle bounded by Superior, Huron and Ontario.  More street activity in that area would be great, but since the mall is actually out of sight, I'm not really surprised that it hasn't spurred development at street level. 

 

A cantilevered convention center on the other side of Huron might help if it is visible at street level and includes street level storefronts, but I doubt that that will make it into the final design.  But if not, I don't think it will add many more feet to the sidewalks around Tower City.

[EagleFan]

Not sure, but my guess is many urbanohio regulars supported the Tower City mall 20 years ago.  What went wrong, if anything?  Will the convention center fix that?

[X]

Not sure, but my guess is that most urbanohio regulars where between diapers and Junior High when Tower City was built.

[Matches]

Yikes, this could end badly if we use this thread as a "Where did Tower City go wrong" thread.

 

On the CC, if the question is, will placing the CC behind Tower City mean a return of higher-end stores to the mall, I as an uneducated  nobody, would say not immediately, and not likely for at least 10 years.  The market is already (reportedly) over-saturated with retail, particularly on the fringes of the county, and numbers do not look great on the interior.  Is Tower City really just "convention traffic" away from being an elite retail center again?  Offhand it doesn't strike me that retailers would look at "potential convention traffic" as a go-to stat that would convince someone of viability at Tower City, when it seems many other factors are keeping them away.  But maybe I'm wrong.

[Clvlndr in LV]

^I don't think you are wrong Matches, though 10 years is optimistic IMO.

 

I try to look at this from FCE's perspective and ask myself; Why would I offer to lease the Higbee building for a dollar a year? Answer: I get to put $40 million back on the books (approx cost of renovating Terminal Tower) and that looks good to share holders. This is $40 mill I can't get from anyone other than the county.

 

My fear is this is all FCE wants with perhaps the building of additional parking.

 

My hope is that they have a grander vision of constructing the cc in such a way that the future development of hotel, residential, and retail could be built on top of the cc (ie, 515 Euclid Ave).

[peabody99]

I think it is embarrassing so much will invested in this before repairing some of the crumbling infrastructure in the area. I would be ashamed for visitors to even venture in the Flats anymore with collapsed or nearly impassable roads, broken bridges and all. It is a shame too b/c so much of our history lies there. I have no trust regarding our local government and developers. I am sure we are paying for the kick backs too. Seeing as there is an ongoing FBI raid (which I hope will nab some more crooks at other levels) I do not think my comments are out of line.  I feel less and less assured that the final decision will be first driven by what is actually best for the city.

[clvlndr]

Indiana Convention Center

 

http://www.icclos.com/

[audidave]

I'd say its fair to compare Indy to Columbus.  I don't think its fair to make comparisons to Cleveland as far as historical buildings, the age of the infrastructure around tower city, the amount of land to build on, and last but not least the topography.  The Indianapolis convention center may be a very elegant solution for Indianapolis.  Its hardly going to be an elegant solution for Cleveland to slap it up against the underbelly of an 80 yr old complex overhanging a river. 

 

 

 

[clvlndr]

I'd say its fair to compare Indy to Columbus. I don't think its fair to make comparisons to Cleveland as far as historical buildings, the age of the infrastructure around tower city, the amount of land to build on, and last but not least the topography. The Indianapolis convention center may be a very elegant solution for Indianapolis. Its hardly going to be an elegant solution for Cleveland to slap it up against the underbelly of an 80 yr old complex overhanging a river.

 

Much of what you say is true, they are different cities and the typography is very different.  But the juxtaposition of the cc's is similar: backside near the center square (circle) town, shopping mall, sports stadiums, several hotels ... even the old central train station which Indy is contemplating as a hub for commuter rail -- all attached as would be TC.  And Indy and Cleveland are similar in size and Midwestern character... And the very thing you find wrong -- the underbelly, is exactly why it should be built there.  The area btw Huron and Collision Bend is a wasteland that needs to be spruced up. 

 

Now the instability of the riverbed, as Peabody notes, could be a deal breaker.

 

 

[Clevelover]

I know I'm stating the obvious, and please forgive me, but in my opinion, TC failed because its novelty wore off and there was no traffic through it expect during working hours. The CC will not solve the problems of TC. More residential construction in the area is what will bring TC back to life.

The CC is another grand Cleveland idea that is being viewed, I believe, separately by the developers instead of being integrated into the fabric of Downtown. The TC site can work for the CC but more thought needs to be given to how it can bring that part of Downtown Cleveland more vibrancy. I'd hate to see the CC just rushed into existence because we need a new one, though we do need a new one!

[ks5214]

I know I'm stating the obvious, and please forgive me, but in my opinion, TC failed because its novelty wore off

 

Novelty wore off?  That's completely wrong.. TC has STRUGGLED, not failed (last I checked, the doors aren't locked and the lights aren't off), because it hasn't had the downtown population to support it.. once the downtown population increases, especially with young professionals with disposable income to spend, then you'll see it strengthen and more upscale stores return.  Shopping isn't a novelty.. it'll never go away.

[MayDay]

Folks, one more time - this thread is about the Convention Center/Medical Mart - it's not for speculating as to why Tower City's retail component has struggled.

[Cleburger]

Anyone else suspicious of Fred Nance's involvement in all this?

[3231]

^Nope. Why Fred Nance?

[imnotjason]

I'd say its fair to compare Indy to Columbus.  I don't think its fair to make comparisons to Cleveland as far as historical buildings, the age of the infrastructure around tower city, the amount of land to build on, and last but not least the topography.  The Indianapolis convention center may be a very elegant solution for Indianapolis.  Its hardly going to be an elegant solution for Cleveland to slap it up against the underbelly of an 80 yr old complex overhanging a river. 

 

Much of what you say is true, they are different cities and the typography is very different.  But the juxtaposition of the cc's is similar: backside near the center square (circle) town, shopping mall, sports stadiums, several hotels ... even the old central train station which Indy is contemplating as a hub for commuter rail -- all attached as would be TC.  And Indy and Cleveland are similar in size and Midwestern character... And the very thing you find wrong -- the underbelly, is exactly why it should be built there.  The area btw Huron and Collision Bend is a wasteland that needs to be spruced up. 

 

Now the instability of the riverbed, as Peabody notes, could be a deal breaker.

 

I don't have any comment on topography, but I think what works in Indianapolis could work in Cleveland given some specific elements.

 

I made a trip out there last year to see some family - they live in Noblesville (think Delaware in comparison to Columbus) but work downtown.  They're not exactly urbanites but they excitedly took us downtown to see the Circle Centre Mall for dinner and wandering.

 

A couple of things struck me that I think contribute to the success there compared to, say, Columbus's City Center Mall.  First off, the skyways and indoor connections don't try to replace the sidewalks and street grid, but instead compliment it.  The connections are surprisingly extensive, making it easy for folks in town in the winter to get around.  At the same time the streets are lined with restaurant seating and it was obvious people wanted to be outside to enjoy the nice weather. 

 

Second, there was plenty of garage parking but it was integrated into the surrounding buildings so that it didn't beak up the streetscape.  If you want suburbanites to come, you're going to need parking. 

 

Third, the connection to the convention center and RCA dome does definitely bring foot traffic.  The way the walkways and streets are structured invites visitors to spread out from there. 

 

Finally, there were a lot of new and interesting (for suburbanites, that is) stores and restaurants, like the Weber Grille.  I'd probably rather find some kooky local falafel place myself, but this is what draws lots of people.

 

So, can it be done in Cleveland?  I think it could definitely be done in Columbus, and probably Sacramento, because those cities are eerily identical.  I think the convention center and medical mart might hit the third point but the other three probably need work, and I think they're just as important. 

[mrnyc]

Several other cities in the past ten years have built convention centers.  If they were not additions, what did they use their old one for?  I have not really seen that on this discussion yet.

 

fantastic question. i'm very curious too so i googled a bit about it this morning and here is what i found:

 

wash, dc

mixed use development

http://dcmud.blogspot.com/2008/03/old-convention-center-new-designs.html

 

nashville

they're debating it

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080812/COLUMNIST0101/808120341/1092

 

charlotte

retail?

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2004_4th/Dec04_CharlotteConvCenter.html

 

philadelphia

demolition to....a tennis court?!!!

http://oldegoodthings.com/newsletter7.htm

http://pqliving.com/?p=1570

 

louisville

facelift

http://www.oldlouisville.com/Ruins/Tyler/CC.htm

 

raleigh

a taxpayer-funded mariott?

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/wake/convention_center/story/400397.html

 

austin

old palmer cc was rebuilt into part of a new performing arts complex

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/downtown/eventscenter.htm

 

pittsburgh

rebuilt on same site

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_L._Lawrence_Convention_Center

 

cape may, nj

casino money to replace old cc destroyed in a 1962 storm

http://www.capemaycountyherald.com/article/7943-new-convention-hall-look-pre-1962-design

 

 

 

 

[RyanScav]

i would just like to say that if you think that this development will "kill" street life then you are mistaken. Having this CC downtown will increase street life GREATLY.

 

Scav, You seem to be stating this as a fact but yet you don't provide any examples from other cities, local surveys or other data. In the absence of such data, this is an opinion. Thus the only "mistaken" person here is you for believing we all should share your opinion.

 

here is the statistics:

 

downtown cleveland does not have a medical mart/convention center right now.

 

when one is added, street life will increase.

 

if we were to be moving it from a downtown location to another downtown location then you would have to have numbers..

 

but if its something that doesnt exist now, and will in the future, then there is no debate, its only a question of how MUCH street traffic will increase.

 

you could then come back and say yeah but what about the old CC site.. well thats out of the question because regardless of how much traffic you would lose from the old spot.. you are going to gain so much more in the public square area.

 

its not an opinion.. take it as you will KJP.. but regardless of where they were to put the medical mart and convention center its going to get people there that wouldnt have been there before.

[mrnyc]

^ yeah, but if they don't ever have to leave the interconnected tc/cc complex how would we ever know that?

[3 Dog Pat]

Scav, the medical mart will not increase street life, just as the merchandise mart here in Chicago does not either.

It will just be a series of showrooms for medical eauipment, shown to hospital administrators and the like, not the general public.

 

I think the MM is a great thing, it just wont generate any street life.

[KJP]

You may be right, Scav. You may be wrong. But am I supposed to believe that just because X will be in a given area that Y will happen just because you say so? On what do you base your opinion? Give me some case examples. What did you do to earn that opinion? Did you see street life outside another city's convention center? How was it designed? What was there before? What are the surrounding the land uses and were they there before the convention center?

 

C'mon, Scav. Tell me some observations and stories based on places you've been and things you've seen. How did you earn your opinion?

[Cleburger]

^Nope. Why Fred Nance?

Nance was under the microscope for several dealings with the White administration, including the construction of Browns stadium.  Sounds like someone stands to make some money of the taxpayer again...

[TMH]

This thread and especially the last post reminds me of many of the comments on Cleveland.com.  Stop with the conspiracy theories.  Most people outside of Cleveland or people in Cleveland who have attended conventions in other cities can see the logic of placing the convention center next to Tower City and the Medical Mart in TC.  There are arguments for the existing convention center that make some sense, but obviously they were not compelling enough for all parties involved in this project.  I am happy that it will be downtown and not in Midtown or University Circle. 

[RyanScav]

glad you asked.. (and sorry my last post i was rushing out the door to get to the tribe game and, looking back, it did not seem very intelligent)

 

http://www.pittsburghcc.com/cc/_pdf/2008SpringHungryBrochure.pdf

here is a link to a brochure that a visitor to the pittsburg convention center would get if they were looking for food. this gives them many options within walking distance. the food court at tower city is good, but im SURE that most visitors will be looking for a little more. plus it would get waay crowded in that food court so people who normally eat there might not choose to after the cc gets built because of said crowd.

 

 

it was estimated that a new convention center will mean an EXTRA 200,000 - 250,000 people per year - or about 1,000 more people (above the current average number of convention visitors) per week day. even if only 20 percent of these people leave the convention for lunch,  thats an extra 200 people in the streets outside of tower city.. or at 10 bucks a meal.. 20,000 dollars to area restaurants per day. these numbers dont include the medical mart customers or employees, and i dont even touch on dinner.

 

my point is this:

 

no, the tower city site does not force people to go outside, therefore the city of cleveland gains less foot traffic than if the original cc site was chosen. However, it is, IN MY MIND, going to somewhat increase foot traffic in the public square area.

 

[KJP]

Thank you.

[3231]

^Nope. Why Fred Nance?

Nance was under the microscope for several dealings with the White administration, including the construction of Browns stadium. Sounds like someone stands to make some money of the taxpayer again...

 

Well, a lot of people make money off of the taxpayer. Are you suggesting that contractors ought to reject any profits that they make when building roads or providing services? Should consultants all offer their services gratis? Or are you saying that someone is accepting bribes? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest BelievelandD]

I will have to say at this point I can poitn out pro's and con's for all proposed sites.  However, I am for the tower city site because I think it can act as a great epicenter for our downtown area.  Also, I was walking from mallorca to the tribe game friday night right down huron road where the proposed site would be.  I was thinking how neat of an area that is and how unfortunate the minimal foot traffic on huron road is.  I think this wil develop good foot traffic both ways.  In terms of eating well they are a 5 minute walk to the warehouse district or a green trolley ride away.  I just want them to get started on this thing!

[sky]

The rumor I hear is that the execs at Medical Mart from Chicago are quite pissed off at the Greater Cleveland Partnership's "recommendation" in that it does not take into consideration their specific needs for the site and in that the numbers are substantially flawed.   

[Clvlndr in LV]

^ That's quite an interesting rumor. My guess is folks around here are not to keen on rumors, but I would like to hear more about this. Can you reveal your source and/or its credibility?

[Clvlndr in LV]

Stumbled across this today - http://www.worldproductcentre.com

 

I knew that New York was persuing a medical mart of sorts but this looks like something on a much grander scale. Can anyone shed some light on whether or not this would compete directly with ours for permanent exhibitors and/or conventions? At first blush, it certainly does to me.

[Ctownrocks1]

From what I remeber from an article a year ago it stated that worldproductcentre was not going to be competing for trade shows and that it had no plans to actually host any medical trade shows itself.

 

They were hoping that a medical mart would be open across the street from this site, however, which would compete for the tradeshows but I couldn't find any information on that.

 

Have the plans changed and been integrated so that this buildling will host tradeshows as well?

 

Also the expected time of completion for this keeps getting postponed with an estimate of completion now for the winter of 2013 so bascially 2014. I would hope Cleveland could get the medical mart part of the deal going before 2014 and hopefully get a year or two jump on the business, that is if NYC even gets a medical mart.

[Clvlndr in LV]

^ "Have the plans changed and been integrated so that this buildling will host tradeshows as well?"

 

From what I've read on their website it looks as if they'll have conference halls and the like, but keep in mind its right next to the Javitz Center so they could easily hold tradeshows there. Also the website says the building will be able to house up to 1,800 permanant companies including those selling medical devices, health technologies, diagnostic equipment, healthcare furnishings among others. Seems they don't need a MM across the street, they've got one inside.

[Ctownrocks1]

Looking at their layout they have a 10-15 story trade show exhibit then? The article stated they were only going to have a permanent on site exhibit is that different then trade shows which get new technological items etc.

[3 Dog Pat]

Not sure what to make about this article.  Was anyone at the meeting?

 

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/09/taxpayers_voice_skepticism_in.html

 

 

Taxpayers voice skepticism in Cleveland Heights about medical mart plan

Posted by jkuehner September 02, 2008 22:10PM

Tracy Boulian/The Plain Dealer

 

A selection committee picked the Tower City site for the new $536 million convention center and medical mart. Residents gathered in Cleveland Heights Tuesday to voice their concerns to Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones and project coordinator Fred Nance.

 

[willyboy]

I didnt see any of the good arguments made in the article regarding site selection that Ive seen on this site.  I was hoping that somebody from here would at least attend one of these meetings and ask some of the tough questions/make the tough arguments the were made on here.  There have been opportunities to corner Peter Lawson (previously at Bar Cento) and now Nance as well, so where are all the people concerned about the site selection and some of the faulty$$ reasoning behind it???