“County Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones said Friday that he and Commissioners Tim Hagan and Jimmy Dimora want to look at the largely vacant land in the Warehouse District from the northwest corner of Public Square west to West Sixth Street, and from Superior Avenue on the south to St. Clair Avenue on the north.
Three other sites are under consideration, including the existing convention center beneath the downtown Mall, the Cuyahoga riverfront behind Tower City Center and the lakefront west of Browns Stadium.
Jones also confirmed that the county would hold a public hearing on the pros and cons of the four sites on Thursday, May 22, probably in the early evening, at a location yet to be determined…” (go to article)
May 4, 2008 at 7:32 am
Why is there not one architect or urban planning professional on the site selection committee for building a new convention center and medical mart???
Were it an issue of law, accounting, or medicine, you would expect representation from the experts in those fields. Similarly, the implications of placing a complex like this in the city have very real operational concerns and impacts on the city… concerns that are taught architects in school, examined in the professional registration process, and are dealt with in their jobs on a daily basis.
Unfortunately, construction of civic complexes and the planning of cities is an act of creating legacies and ego edifaces, thus the decision-making is entitled to civic-boosters and corporate leaders who want to be the ones who make the decisions to resurrect the city - regardless of whether they are equipped to make decisions intelligently or not.
Thank you Joe Roman.
And this letter from AIA to Commissioner Jones… it should be submitted to the Plain Dealer as an editorial. Stand up AIA, make a stink.
May 4, 2008 at 3:16 pm
The other problem probably stems from some of the architectural profession lacking the ability to stand up for what it believes in by constantly bending to the arbitrary whims of the client without cultivating the relationship needed to a) fully understand and appreciate the problem, b) giving the client the options necessary to solve the problem, c) educating the client what the impact of each solution is and d) gain the trust and mutual respect necessary for a project to be truly successful.
There is something about the need to make a quick buck and/or become instantly famous that tarnishes any professional image.
May 12, 2008 at 9:44 am
Well, architects and urban planners COULD be civic boosters if they had spine and cared about the city in which they live. Perhaps it is too easy to simply switch firms or be engaged in building projects elsewhere. As Dru points out, if your fame and fortune lie elsewhere, a commitment to problem solving, education, trust and advocacy for the place where you live is lost.
If you guys have some brilliant planning ideas, let’s see them. If options 1, 2, 3 or 4 are best, let’s hear which and why. Is there a better solution not already mentioned? What is it? (assuming that this pie in the sky business proceeds).
Let’s argue the point online where it can be shared with others who are not in your inner circle. Let’s not devolve to a “build and bitch” boys club here. Virtual activism, I think, made a huge difference with the Breuer. Don’t wait for others to lead - let us follow your expertise.
You have 10 days to state your case and find advocates for said before intelligent statements can be made to the commissioners/GCP. If we were to advocate for an architect and an urban planner on the site selection committee, who would those persons be and why? If one site is better than another, please make those points. Come on guys; stick your necks out here. It is better to have loved and lost, than to have never loved at all.
Politicians can be voted out of office, architects move on to “greener grass”. What about a legacy for the city and the region which will remain long after we’re gone?
May 13, 2008 at 10:24 am
While it often becomes a back and forth between Dru and I (not by design, of course, even in CDC’s infancy stats indicate that there are many ‘lurkers’), thoughts are posted here on CDC open for discussion by all… below are a few links where convention center opinions are explained in separate posts - and like the Breuer discussion, writings will intensify in the coming days.
I favor the Mall site for a variety of reasons - - as you note, Susan, it may fuel the discussion if I post a ‘design rag’ post in the coming days that compiles my position in one place and feeds the ‘virtual activism’ you speak of.
And I agree that architects COULD be civic boosters, however it seems that oftentimes there isn’t a cohesive community of designers and thinkers - - CDC’s aggregating attempts to at least facilitate growing awareness to architects, designers, and anyone else to what the current issues and discussion are in Cleveland on any given day.
http://clevelanddesigncity.com/2008/03/22/plain-dealer-county-also-looking-at-lakefront-site-for-mart-complex/
http://clevelanddesigncity.com/2008/03/19/plain-dealer-forest-city-says-it-can-connect-medical-mart-with-convention-center-through-tower-city-cinemas/
http://clevelanddesigncity.com/2008/03/16/plain-dealer-commissioners-seek-advice-on-site-for-convention-center/