misterjoshr

This is really exciting! Between this and what Mavrick is doing...good things on the horizon for this area.

the project on west 14th in Tremont is moving right along. I would say this would be an example of (regardless of density or parking) design malpractice. I worry it is what happens when we just give up on design as this sort of subjective thing that we shouldn't comment on or try to regulate. It isn't like a color issue or a one element thing -- this is just so cheap and bland and should not be what is acceptable these days. This isn't a developer who took a chance on something different where there may be varying views -- this is just cheap and lazy. and if the project had no parking or lots of parking or even came with an electric bus for folks to use -- it still would be a bummer. Is the new bar?

I also wanted to add that so much of the critiques from older people towards younger renters are really bizarre -- they wouldn't want to rent a 1500 apartment so therefore there is something less about those people. The reality is most of my tenants are solidly working class. They make between 40-60k a year. Sure they aren't getting off an assembly line, but they work 40 hours a week, deal with student loan debt etc. No different really then the other middle class folks around town. Not wanting them in your neighborhood is about as noble as someone saying they don't want Ford workers in their neighborhood or some other middle class group

Such an interesting topic. I do think there should be a vested interest in having developers spend some (more) money on the skin of their building, as part of a larger development agreement. That doesn't mean I will like the design necessarily, but often times literally the amount you spend PSF on it does correlate. That building in Tremont being proposed (by the church) isn't just that there's a subjective design debate -- it is that they needed to hit a very low budget number and the skin suffered. I don't think being unable to eliminate some subjectivity in aesthetics means you don't value it at all. That said, in no way do I find the aesthetic critiques of the Fulton House at all reasonable. This design seems like a reasonable, thoughtful approach. And I think the parking critique are more a red herring then anything else. Like, there seems to be a wide swath of space to agree on between no parking and 2 or even 1.5 spaces per unit. What I find so sad about all the dialogue is the amount of oxygen these sort of issues take up as opposed to the education disparities over the last year, stagnant wages etc. It is like we can't make sense of the macro-economic trends around us and their implications, so instead we blame developers and multi-family housing. It feels really over-heated and not proportional to the problems the region faces

can it? where are you seeing that and it is actually filling up? most of the places I know of in the city say they are when reporters come around and ask and then advertise 2-3 months free if you sign with them and have trouble pulling 3% increases each year. if it is happening, it is a rarity, especially in midtown. That's not a knock on the neighborhood or the projects. I have one very adjacent. I love the area. I just think it is a long term play for a solid double if everything goes well

you are a generation away from getting the rents to support a 20 story building in this neighborhood.

this is outstanding news. Dave's leaving the neighborhood was really destabilizing. This can only help. re-using Dave's is an uphill battle for sure. Kudos to someone for even trying.

Corner of Scranton and Willey. Adjacent to Fairmont creamery, Wagner awning and tappan building

I got the chance to see 2125 superior. I had no idea it is all basically like a hotel/airbnb with some extended stays and not a typical residential building. Was that always the plan? If you do something like that, do you avoid like the hotel/tourist taxes? It'll be interesting to see if Cleveland is ready for such a concept.

I won’t deviate from the positive narrative — my bad. We never would have done more if we weren’t able to subsidize the rents with our funding. It is why we moved away from the market rate model. But I end up doing a lot of the tours etc so I may be too close to situation to be objective about the market. that all said this project looks great and if anyone could blow it out of the park, it this kind of project. It is super exciting, a very cool design and great for the neighborhood. Carry on!

I have no idea what data people are looking at that supports all of this but who cares -- this looks great and is really exciting

I was only referring to the Tremont Plan. Not familiar enough w/ the context on West Blvd

so, just to put forward a slightly different POV. and I should posit that I don't agree with all the parking arguments made (although I think some Parking would be nice) nor do I think this debate merits some of the vitriol at city planners that I have seen/read. My concern about the project is that it looks like bland architecture. Not the kind where it is a challenging design and debate is natural. I get that. Aesthetics are subjective. But this just is like a blasé approach that doesn't speak to anything whatsoever. This feels especially like a lost opportunity given the investment nearby in historic buildings and new construction. I just get the sense that this design fails to exceed any minimum threshold standards for quality design and placemaking. More density is a very worthwhile goal, but only in the context of a quality project that enhances the street life. While the building might hold the corner in form, where are the first floor uses and entrances that help it feel more welcoming. Does this height compliment the existing historic church? While it is very reasonable to disagree on any of these points, or an aesthetic issue, can anyone really state this rendering represents anything remotely aspirational about the future of the neighborhood? Is the absence of parking an excuse to not have to come up with an aspirational design? If so, Planning should make that more clear. I feel like that is exactly, whether intentional or unintentional, what the various oversight boards and planners who have green-lighted this are saying Tremont should be past the point of just accepting any project because we are woebegotten Cleveland and grateful for the investment. There's no reason why it can't ask for something more challenging and thoughtful and that 50 years from now will hold up to scrutiny

this is super exciting. it is beyond interesting to read about people who see/experience the market really different then I do. Fresh eyes are what we need

Friendly disagreement. I think, although I have had my frustrations with them (and they would say the same about me :)), that it is too simple to say they're anti-development. They've approved a ton of development in the last 5 years without much rancor. I think the neighborhood has poor infrastructure, many of its residents haven't seen wage growth or increased prosperity and are consequently more skeptical of change. This takes on many forms and might seem anti-development but I think it is much deeper. I also wanted to touch on the comment above about the hillsides being green spaces. That would be amazing but I worry this is impractical. I don't think this area is high priority and that the resources would be devoted to keeping these attractive, litter-free, safe and well-lit spaces. We pushed for many years -- we gets plans and walk throughs done but the follow-up just isn't there (perhaps because the resources are not there) I don't normally say this but it is likely that the private sector could do a better job on these basic things then the NGOs and City could -- which isn't a knock but just a reality of where priorities are given limited resources.

this is exciting. Wiley has been such a major failure for so long and a financial and spiritual drag on our buildings, so seeing it improve is really exciting

Thanks. We have a great team/partners and are excited to start digging at the end of October.

Are RFPs really the best way to get these complicated projects going? It just seems so ridiculous for a complicated project like this one -- everyone has 30-60 days to put together fabulous renderings and unstudied numbers -- and the more shameless you are the better chance you have of being awarded. There's got to be a better way, especially for complicated projects like the RTA one

the way we like it ?

As I sort of said above, the upper floors actually don't lay out well for apartments. No charm. Little natural light on the side that faces the light well. That it would become workforce housing/LIHTC housing makes sense, frankly, because to turn those into market rate units at the scale needed would be incredibly difficult. If they could drive the rents down, it has a fighting chance of working. We see so many pictures of that first floor and the old bank lobby/mezzanine but that represents such a small portion of the building that is otherwise charmless(subjective, I know). I hope it does get preserved and this project is wildly successful but to me it has more embedded challenges then even your typical "impossible" historic rehab fwiw.

this is super exciting and wonderful to see this corner built up!

I am posting his own words and saying discussing a wellness building when you literally threaten people who might have pre-existing conditions or family members who might feels like a slight contradiction that is worth noting. I hope the building is a huge success. I love the neighborhood I root for 99% of development to succeed but I just find the hypocrisy to be relevant if I were a tenant, considering who I wanted as a landlord or if I were a journalist reporting on a project and not just serving as a conduit for a press release.

Is it a personal shot to say someone who threatens their employees to come back to work or he will let Unemployment know.... Feels like highly relevant information for any prospective tenant. I mean, these projects are living/breathing things, right? The people and the businesses feel like a highly relevant part of the "project".

It is sort of LOL to go from "urban" to "luxury" living and now we are on wellness living. Even richer when done by the same guy who pushes people to go back to work early or he will contact unemployment. Let's hope that people don't just repeat his phrasing in articles about this project. Words should still mean something.