Htsguy

^?

Dinn, Hockman and Potter out in the burbs. Legit firm.

Does anybody know anything about MLO Properties? Have they actually ever built anything? Also wondering who plaintiff's counsel is.

Thanks for the information. Any idea what a reasonable purchase price might be in order to fulfill your ideal concept? I am sure there are structural issues.

No offensive but I adamantly disagree with you. This area is in the heart of the city (hell it is where Cleveland was founded) and has incredible potential. No joke,

He should become a member of this forum for appropriate guidance.

Wow there are other smart people in the city who are not members of UrbanOhio?

In 67 pages of discussion I have never heard talk of a phase 2 at all let alone in that area. My gut is that Stark just doesn't want to be bothered with a building that is in serious disrepair, although that is pure speculation on my part. Again, I think it is ironic that the whole Nucleus project was born out of the dispute the city was having with the California investors and now we may be back to square one with the Herold Building. I always thought it strange during the last 5 years that Stark never discussed plans for the Herold Building and the parking lot next to it as it related to the project.

I guess my question is whether the city will fight demolition as vigorously as they did five years ago when the California group had ownership or whether things have changed now that Stark is the owner and he is building a 350 mil development across the street

I was having such a nice day and you had to remind be about this boondoggle. I know it doesn't work this way once money is allocated for a project but it frustrates me so much when worthwhile projects like the mall land bridge and Irishtown bend (hell even the 2 mil to fix Public Square) are probably searching desperately for money and we are going forward with this.

In his recent blog about Nucleus @KJP indicated that the Herold Building is slated for demo along with garage and that small building which is just about across the street from Red Steakhouse. Herold Building is next door to the parking lot at the southwest corner of Prospect and East 4th. About 5 years ago the owners (from California wanted to demo it and the city fought it tooth and nail in housing court (with the city winning at every turn) and they eventually sold it to Stark. Stark has apparently done nothing to shore up the building since and according to the blog is seeking to demo it now.

I was actually wondering the same thing.

There 65 pages of skepticism in this thread regarding Stark as a developer and Nucleus as a viable project. Much of it very legit. However, based on statements of people possibly in the know (including @KJP who is usually on top of things) we may actually finally be beyond that point. I guess we will know for sure in a month or so.

Misgivings about the project itself or whether it will ever come to be? Like @X posted above, it is annoying when one just blurts out a "misgiving" without providing some facts in support of the statement {based on inside information or not) or even speculates so that other forum members can rationally consider the information or opinion and hopefully respond in order to foster discussions. To childishly simple state "this won't happen" is just plain annoying.

Every poster who clamors for retail in every damn project no matter how far from the hub of retail activity and despite the fact that we cannot fill what is available now (and ignoring the fact that retail is tough all over and that the Cleveland area is statistically over retailed) should be force to open a store in that project with their own money.

The closing of Burke is a topic that comes up at least on an annual basis on the forum if not more often. The debate goes on for 2-3 pages and then disappears until the next go around. Everybody has strong views on the subject. Its use as parkland always seems to be a popular view. I am hardly an expert but over the years people have indicated the following: The FAA will not allow it or the approval process would be long and drawn out (again I don't know if this is true). As noted above it is built on a landfill which limits what type of development can go in (which I guess favors the park people). Building anything large could be very expensive given the land underneath and does that make sense when there is so much vacant land downtown that would cost less to build on. Finally, you always hear that the land underneath is very toxic (again I have no idea what that means but make sense if the landfill includes dredging from the river) which would either be a regulatory nightmare to build on and at a minimum would increase development costs significantly

Interesting to read the thoughts of so many relatively new members on the board concerning the lakefront, Very deja vu. Now if only something would get done before you find me playing bridge with Mike White and Jane Campbell in our nursing home.

Actually I can provide you a list of valuable lots that have stayed vacant for years (like 30 or more) after demo, none more glaring than on Public Square. In fact with all the nearby attractions you list it could be argued that this makes it a highly valued piece of real estate for parking more than anything else.

KJP the purported demolition of the Herold Building is new and disturbing. The city fought tooth and nail to prevent its demo 5 years ago and in fact that whole legal battle is probably what forced those California investors to sell to Stark in the first place. Rather than at least make some minor efforts to shore up the building it looks like Stark just let it deteriorate further. I am not a happy camper. Is the city just going to let him now expand that parking lot it borders on 4th? Doesn't he have to have a development plan in order to use it temporarily for parking?

If that is true that explains a lot. A small business getting behind in its taxes will find it had to recover no matter how busy you are. The state will never let you go and you are going to be personally liable. Sign of bad budgeting and management.

Wonder if there is not more to this. Cannot say I am incredibly familiar with their business as I only ate there once (downtown location...food was great). However, we had to wait almost an hour on a bleak January Saturday mid morning and their was still a huge wait after we left. Nothing really going on that day downtown and this location had been open more than a year at the time so its not like it was crowded because it was new and novel ( of course the small space added to the wait but I would also think that would mean the rent was not that much of nut to crack). Sometimes an owner/operator just gets burned out in the restaurant business. I have no clue...maybe business truly was bad. Again the food was great so a bit of a lost.

OK, got it.

I will grant you number 1. Don't think 2-4 are delay factors or even correct. The big nut you did not mention: The need for creative financing in Cleveland which really must be a work of art compared to other cities.

Well this post sure put a smile on my face

My feeling it is restaurants all over town and it is due to expansion. It seems 10-15 years ago you always had an hour to hour and a half wait at a good place on a Saturday night (or if reservations were taken you had to make them well in advance on a Saturday...I remember Lola's in Tremont was like two months in advance on a Saturday) and even mediocre places has some sort of a wait on the weekend. Now a days I am amazed how easy it is to walk in and get a table on weekends almost every where. Even the hot spots don't seem to have the waits of yesterday. There are just so many choices now. By the way I was never a Mitchell's fan but it was one of those places that always seemed packed for years and now, just as you describe, it seems empty much of the time.