cadmen

No question the Nucleus site is an easier build IF that's their focus. I just wonder WHAT their focus is? Maybe Ken will have some answers.

Just speculating but with the Tower City development down to the river such a large and decade's long project l wonder if the Stark land is a buy and sit property. Meaning they will acquire the land now so they will have control but have no plans to develop it in the foreseeable future. Developers like Bedrock think longterm, which, while acquiring this land might make sense for them now, if they don't have any real plans to develop in the near term that would be harmful to downtown progress. Keeping it a parking lot does us no good.

They don't. The only thing stock buybacks strengthen are the portfolios of stockholders. Of course the top echelon in the company benefit even moreso as they tend to own large numbers of shares. Investing in any company is better for the long term. Investing in stock buybacks benefit only those holding stocks and usually only in the short term as more shares are traded than those held long term.

The unfinished part is the section that covers the silver band along the top of the building. The southern and western side have a second skin while the northern and eastern side were not covered leaving it looking unfinished. After some speculation on this forum somebody posted it was planned that way. Something about weatherization if l remember. Still looks unfinished to me.

^ Are you speculating or do you have some internal info? Totally agree that it is a beautiful building, one of the handsomest downtown. If it's turned into residential l'm not sure how successful it will be, at least initially due to competition from the Millennium project and the old SHW Landmark space. Then again, the Rose building may jump to the head of the line because of its smaller size. The only thing l worry about is where the top is in downtown residential. I don't think anyone knows at this point. Aside from potentially adding another conversion as a plus l think losing another office (and headquarters to boot) is a net lose for downtown.

Yeah but the only problem was they left two of the four sides unfinished. It looks like a half finished job.

Do they still have a black bear mascot in a pit/semi natural area in a city park? A local told me it was as city tradition.

I guess l'm the only one here who sees this in at least a questionable light. I'm not an accountant so l can't speak to whether it's more favorable to own rather than lease. I can see advantages in both so, that being said, l prefer my Fortune 500 company to own rather than lease their national headquarters. The optics look better as owning at least gives the appearance of having more skin in the game. A greater sense of permanence if you will. Sure, leasing would free up funds to start building a second tower but l'm not sure that is really what would be driving construction. I think it is way more about a potential need for space rather than any financial machinations. With the way companies are giving back leased space these days l'm sceptical SHW ever builds a second tower at all. Now if they were a more aggressive company l could see them building a second tower to take advantage of the additional space as needed while at the same time leveraging some of the cost by leasing some space. After all, the ONLY office space in town that appears to be wanted is class A space. But since SHW is not an aggressive company l remain sceptical about another building.

Right. I don't know what l like better, the very modern design or the fact it's filling in a parking lot. Either way, it's all good.

Great! I like big buildings.

Anybody know if the bollards will be movable, as in will they be capable of submerging into the ground and back up when necessary?

Oh man! I don't even want to think about Key being bought out.

It's not that development hasn't occurred in Ohio City before TMUD. Of course it has. But the scale of Bridgeworks is different than the usual 4-5 story apartment building. The only thing that comes close is Church & State. There is no question that this neighborhood is growing. The real question is how big and how fast? Another factor in the favor of Bridgeworks is not just its ability to kickstart midrise housing on the west side of 25th but it also could do the same as a connector for west 25th and the west bank of the Flats. Having something as prominent on that corner may spur further development of the Flats hillside. We could have a more seamless area of activity. I guess my point is that while I agree we will see development in the entire area over time I just think Bridgeworks has the ability to bring about development sooner rather than later.

In the absence of much else to talk about I'll add this: I see Bridgeworks a transformative because of its design and prominent location. Heading wast over the Detroit Superior bridge, encountering a large, colorful and modern glass structure on that corner says "Welcome to the west side!" It would be a beacon for the area because there's nothing quite like it while at the same time pairing well with the Church & State building. Yes, of course the park will probably be the big draw to the area but there also could be a synergy at play here. One big thing can lead to others. The park CAN lead to mid-rise housing on the west side of 25th. But Bridgeworks can lead to something sooner which would create a tallish, modern urban footprint that would be very unique for Cleveland. We're sort of talking about a chicken or egg scenario here. We can both be right depending on which comes first but I still think adding Bridgeworks creates something much greater to what should ultimately be a very cool neighborhood.

I disagree. Without the credit maybe somebody builds another 5-6 story apartment building on that site. Something like that is not transformative regardless of how hot the corner is. But something like Bridgeworks IS transformative. It would serve as a beacon and could encourage other developers to build 10-15 story apartment/condos on the west side of 25th taking advantage of the great views of the river, park and downtown. That may happen anyway but it also may take another 10 years, wearas Bridgeworks could have kickstarted construction on that much sooner.

While Circle Square is definitely more important than Bridgeworks because of its scale l think it the development might have been built without the credit. UC is booming. A development of this size may have happened anyway. But if you give handouts what developer is going to turn them down? On the other hand l think the credit is perfect for something like Bridgeworks because it actually has the ability to kickstart an already up and coming neighborhood into something really great. Or TRANSFORMATIVE.

It's one thing to have to show a certificate of occupancy to ultimately receive the TMUD credit but that requirement does nothing to penalize a developer who receives the credit and then sits on it because he doesn't have ALL the funds necessary to build. Htsguy is right. If Kassouf doesn't develop Erieview a better developer misses out. Actually being able to develop should be part of the criteria for receiving the TMUD credit.

Maaan! That was one of my favorite developments. Seemed like a transformative project. I guess at this point we can only hope it can find a way to get built on its financial merits alone. I fail to see how/why THIS building is deemed unprofitable to build while others in the city are getting built. It would be one thing if nothing was getting built here. Then I could say it's the market. But projects ARE getting built so what makes this one unable to make the cut? The answer seems murky to me but then, I'm not privy to the discussions.

^ Yeah, sorta like the Stark model. I loved the look of both plans and would have been thrilled if either came to fruition. Sadly, some of the best designs have been nothing more than proposals while many of the designs that actually HAVE been built have been kinda mediocre.

Remember about 10-15 years ago when Stark had what l thought was a really cool plan for a large Warehouse District development? It looked exactly like what was needed to fill in all those parking lots. There were only two problems. The first was Stark wasn't able to entice any tenets to lease the ground floor retail space. Without them he couldn't secure financing for the residential portion either. The second problem was Stark is more of a salesman than he is a developer. Oh he did create the Beacon and Crocker Park but l always got the impression he wanted to create so much more and just didn't have the funds. Bedrock has deeper pockets for sure but l don't know how much of this is pure speculation (ala Stark) and how much is real. At this point l remain sceptical.

If l had my druthers l'd prefer new out of town money and probably David Blitzer at that. Let's get that Ballpark Village started where the Gateway garage is and then add a residential highrise on the old Stark property. That would create some nice density in the neighborhood.

I like the idea of a new Courthouse tower as part of this. As was said above that could be a way to jumpstart government involvement both with a new tower and maybe even better, infrastructure that would support the very large plans for this site. And since a decision regarding the Justice Crnter is imperative and not just something aspirational like the lakefront or even this Tower City expansion maybe it actually gets done sooner. So if its decided that a new Courthouse tower is a better decision than remodeling the old one then by all means use it as leverage to kickstart this development. It's almost like a twofer. Whst happens to the old Justice Center can be left for a different discussion.

So Bedrock is looking at up to a 30 year timeline? If Dan Gilbert is driving this then it's more like from here to eternity. Other than the location I don't think much of what was in the presentation will be reflected in whatever is built. I'm not even sure what the point was at all unless Bedrock is taking a page from the Robert Stark Manual of Hot Air Productions. Look, it's likely anything from one structure to a major buildout is possible but due to the scale, timeline, multiple parties and Gilbert's age/health I think we're jumping the gun here. Forget the fact that we've all seen this movie before, it's just too early in the game for this. If you expect us to have even a little faith get back to us AFTER you have something more concrete from the government entities that you say need to fund part of this. Lord knows Bedrock, we live for development on this forum. But you have to know we are acutely aware there are several whales already in line in front of you (Lakefront land bridge, Browns stadium, new Justice Center) and the problem is until thigs change we remain a relatively poor, smallish city. We can still get expensive things done, it's just that we can probably only do one at a time sooo...

I don't know what my situation says about a possible downturn in the locsl real estate market but here's the scenario. When l bought a house in Lakewood at the end of October there were five offers in two days. It was bid up $12,000 over ask but l got it for the ask as l had cash. Good for me, right? Not so fast because l can't seem to sell my condo in Rocky River even though it's an historic building in a great location. I've already dropped the price and have had only one very low ball bid and negligible showings. Time of year? Rising interest rates or is it a sign of a real estate downturn?

I think that is great news. If the old PD building didn't work out then this might be even better. Downtown keeps the headquarters with all its activity. Another large and underutilized building is repurposed plus having it turned into a police headquarters should help stabilize an already blossoming area. A final note: Interesting how quickly this has transpired. If we were under the Jackson administration l'm sure city hall would still be dithering. See America, voting does matter.