Jukeboxer

Allegro’s Damen Tasseff must be furious he didn’t think of this approach to get McDonald’s approved at Fulton and Lorain a few years back.

Starbucks drive through dumping out onto Abbey across from the entrance to the RTA turnaround should be entertaining

Didn't Soho have a project on Columbus Road a year or two ago that didn't seem to go anywhere?

OCI lit money on fire by bailing out Chagrin Valley Soap with these huts and that it was driven by interim leadership makes it all the more sad. @PlanCleveland said it best that these sort of local goods work best with the local connections and expertise that the purveyors provide. Instead, the huts offered a diluted experience. Even worse, each hut needed staffed separately. I get why Graham and Co. went with a master lease for all the huts but the retail plan ran contrary to the intended design of the project. Hopefully OCI realizes it should avoid the real estate business and pass it on to someone else.

This looks like it hasn't been priced by any contractor - each of these would cost $800,000 or more to build. Every imaginable type of roof, undersized windows in odd places, six-story elevators, seven total bathrooms in each house! Can't wait to see what they list for or what actually gets built.

It was approved for a drive through window on the east side. If it doesn't end up a Chipotle or Starbucks I will be shocked.

Is anyone familiar with the agreement the Bridgeworks development team signed with the county?

Let's not use this project as an example to diagnose the status of market rate development as a whole. I'd put this more in the "inexperienced equity needs any available exit option" than "the market cannot support more market rate development". The only concern to me would be that this is one in a bunch of groups overpaying for land thinking they were three years earlier when it came to interest rates and construction costs, and then not accepting selling at the true value (i.e. for a loss), and the land and project just sitting empty for a while. The vacant property on Vega and Fulton is a good example of that.

It's currently $0.65 per hour to park curbside in Ohio City with the new parking app. Cheaper than the previous coin meter rate. And it doesn't require payment between 6 PM and 7 AM. This should in theory make it easier for residents to have spaces available in the new pay to park zones as it will turn over the cars during the day quicker. In typical neighborhood fashion everyone complains about change without spending a minute thinking about what the change will bring.

I think Columbus beat us to the punch on that development strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbus_City_Center

I don't think it's OCI's fault for Harsax raising rents, but for OCI to make claims about trying to put Karen in a position to stay in the neighborhood by selling her the building at a discount and keep Flying Fig / Pearl Street open is their attempt to skirt any criticism for not doing more when they owned the building. The CDC is not a profit motivated entity so I would say expectations are 100% different. They by no means have a monopoly on decency but they are expected to be more decent or at least take other factors beyond profit into account in their decision making.

The property sold in July 2021 for around $125 PSF. If it wasn’t Harsax I’d expect there would have been a buyer out there willing to pay that price with a long term lease in place at $15 PSF on the first floor. Pearl Street opened in 2022 meaning Karen opened it under her old Flying Fig lease and OCI sold the building when Flying Fig was still open. If OCI thought Flying Fig having a longer term would depress the value of the building, and OCI wanted to avoid selling the building for less, then it knew this day was coming where the rent would go up significantly. The comments from Chris Schmitt on “we tried to sell to Karen Small for a discount” but OCI weren’t willing to extend her lease for fear of depressing the property value seem fairly inconsistent.

Chris Schmitt of OCI released a statement that they tried to sell the building to Karen at a discount before selling it to Harsax. But why didn’t OCI offer a longer lease extension at a lower rent rate before it sold the building? Seems like they had a perfect opportunity to avoid this exact thing from happening.

From the listing at the link above: “The sale includes the real estate and the business, please do not interrupt the business…” - I would guess that Civilization will be impacted by the sale of the building.

Would make sense that Dream is looking at Rockefeller for a better location. Shallow building depth on the wings would be better suited for hotel rooms over apartments anyway.

Still surprised Gillespie didn't get Chipotle to change course and go in with their drive through behind Intro on Abbey / Gehring. Both Chipotle's at W 117th and Cedar Fairmount struggled with quality out of the gate. And it is still more expensive than OCB. I can't remember the specifics of the special grant or loan program that was supposed to be funded by Steelyard to go towards local retail in the near west side but I also haven't heard much in the way of touting its success stories either. I'd agree @marty15it's had a cooling effect on local retail in the neighborhoods.

Gillespie must have a fast food tenant in hand to propose this so he can get a drive-thru in the middle of Ohio City...

Environmental groups blocked the upzoning policy in Minneapolis https://www.startribune.com/court-minneapolis-ordered-to-cease-implementation-of-2040-plan/600182511/

Adding to the complexity here - having two electrical providers makes burying even more of a challenge. Even if you commit to one provider to have them contribute to bury their own wires, there’s absolutely no incentive for the other to cooperate.

Does the new rendering look like the Quarter Phase 1 with some different colors to anyone else?

I think @Dougalis talking about the living and kitchen floor being on the third floor of the townhomes versus being on the second floor. Maybe the developers will put in a pulley system off the back of the patio as part of some faux-industrial aesthetic.

@ExPatClevGuywhat's your concern with this project being approved / built without minimum parking? Trying to read into the "promote wise growth" comment: is it a concern on new apartment residents taking up street parking from other residents? Or is the concern that too many units are being built in the near vicinity or near west side in general? Something else?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">When your project removes the parking the neighbors have used for 20-30 years in a community they have built and you want to show up in and profit within - not complimentary</p>&mdash; Damon Taseff (@damontaseff) <a href="https://twitter.com/damontaseff/status/1375220196940652544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 25, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> "When your project removes the parking the neighbors have used for 20-30 years in a community they have built and you want to show up in and profit within - not complimentary" Damon Taseff (@damontaseff) Mr. Taseff, who redeveloped the West Side Community House one block away from this project, was one of the most active critics of the project. That building has 21 units (11 one-bed; 10 two-bed for 31 bedrooms in total), three office spaces, and Phoenix Coffee, along with a total amount of 14 off-street parking spaces. I'm happy his project was complementary to the community and therefore able to happen. As that project showed, what residents may consider "severely under-parked" residential projects don't bring about the parking nightmares everyone fears. I think the biggest challenge is figuring out how to present this reality to residents in a persuasive way.

Long time listener, first time caller: In the past five years, the same Landmarks Commission has approved both phases of the Quarter, Mariners Watch, Edge 32, Church & State, Clinton West, Knez's Condo Block, W 41st & Lorain, and W 44th & Lorain twice (go look at the first design that was approved). All within the historic district. Particularly with the first phase of the Quarter, I think we can all agree that the design quality was lacking. Hell, even its own developer pivoted the design substantially (and for the better!) with the latest phase. For Fulton House, Landmarks praised the design but objected to the height the first meeting, then criticized the design and the height of a very similar design and shorter proposal the second time around. @Cleburgerand @Clefan98hit it on the head - the design critiques from Landmarks and from neighbors are just another roadblock thrown up to continue objection to a project. As for aspirational design, taking those projects that have happened in the past five years - I'm curious as to which ones neighbors would point to aspirationally? I think most neighbors would point at Clinton West - which was fought tooth and nail by the neighbors around it. Some others might point to Quarter Phase 2 or the Dexter, both of which are monolithic and lacking in warmth - two specific critiques of the latest Fulton House design by Landmarks.