Cleveland is one of the poorest cities in America for a reason.  The city needs to build a tax base with young professionals.

Group, please only post in regards to the topic, downtown and vicinity residences.

 

There are threads for city wide population discussions

Cleveland is one of the poorest cities in America for a reason.  The city needs to build a tax base with young professionals.

 

It is. The Downtown Cleveland Alliance report I posted includes a statistic regarding that progress.

 

EDIT: Here it is.... Cleveland emerging as a magnet for talent attraction, experiencing a 68 percent increase in the number of 25-34 year

old college graduates (2006-2012)

http://www.downtowncleveland.com/media/221278/Q2-2014-DCA.pdf

Cleveland is one of the poorest cities in America for a reason.  The city needs to build a tax base with young professionals.

 

It is. The Downtown Cleveland Alliance report I posted includes a statistic regarding that progress.

 

EDIT: Here it is.... Cleveland emerging as a magnet for talent attraction, experiencing a 68 percent increase in the number of 25-34 year

old college graduates (2006-2012)

http://www.downtowncleveland.com/media/221278/Q2-2014-DCA.pdf

Additionally, household income downtown increased by 274% for $100-150k, 336% for $150-200k and 199% for over $200k. These shifts will cause a snowball effect. Increased population, increased household income, and low vacancy will increase rates helping push new construction. It will also lead to a greater selection of retail and surrounding neighborhoods will continue to grow as well.

^ Huge gains like that are usually caused when the number is very low, and a few people move in. A couple people making over 200k moving in could make the increase percentage that large. Same thing happens when one or two white people move into a neighborhood like Glenville which is predominately black. It shows as a large increase in white population for that census tract, even though the overall population change is rather meaningless.

 

It is positive we are seeing people with that income level move in, but I don't think the numbers are significant enough for any major change to come rushing in.

Cleveland is one of the poorest cities in America for a reason.  The city needs to build a tax base with young professionals.

 

It is. The Downtown Cleveland Alliance report I posted includes a statistic regarding that progress.

 

EDIT: Here it is.... Cleveland emerging as a magnet for talent attraction, experiencing a 68 percent increase in the number of 25-34 year

old college graduates (2006-2012)

http://www.downtowncleveland.com/media/221278/Q2-2014-DCA.pdf

 

At the last census point, there were 2,745 residents living downtown within that age range.

 

Would be interesting to see where that number is today. Could imagine mid 3,000's

Colliers International’s Cooper: Multi-family still on fire in downtown Cleveland

August 12, 2014  |  Dan Rafter

 

How hot is the multi-family market in Cleveland, specifically the city’s downtown?

 

Gary Cooper, senior vice president and principal with the Cleveland office of Colliers International, says it best: “If there’s one thing on fire in downtown Cleveland, it’s multi-family.”

 

The reason for this is a simple one: People want to live in downtown Cleveland. Marcus & Millichap, in its second-quarter 2014 report on Cleveland’s apartment market, said that during the last decade, the downtown population in Cleveland increased by more than 50 percent. Marcus & Millichap predicts that 15,000 residents will be living in downtown Cleveland by 2015.

 

...More people across the country – and not just young people – are choosing to rent apartments instead of to buy homes. And many of these consumers want to live in urban areas in which they can walk to public transportation and bike or walk to restaurants, movie theaters, parks and businesses. Downtown Cleveland offers all of this.

 

See more at: http://www.rejournals.com/2014/08/12/colliers-internationals-cooper-multi-family-still-on-fire-in-downtown-cleveland/#sthash.rN1TfeMN.dpuf

Two small updates....work began on the Creswell Building on Huron behind the Wyndham. Also the Chesterfield is being renovated and re-branded as "Sphere." The sign on the building was vague it just indicated the building will be undergoing a renovation.

Two small updates....work began on the Creswell Building on Huron behind the Wyndham. Also the Chesterfield is being renovated and re-branded as "Sphere." The sign on the building was vague it just indicated the building will be undergoing a renovation.

I was curious if we were going to start seeing the older properties spruce up. The couple times I've been in Chesterfield, it wasn't the nicest place I've seen.

I was curious if we were going to start seeing the older properties spruce up. The couple times I've been in Chesterfield, it wasn't the nicest place I've seen.

 

I also wonder if higher rents in other buildings will make the less expensive (ie: less well-maintained) buildings more attractive to people wanting to live downtown but may not be able to afford some of the nicer buildings. My theory, or perhaps expectation, is that some owners may have less incentive to spend money on their buildings. They're going to get tenants no matter what.

I also wonder if higher rents in other buildings will make the less expensive (ie: less well-maintained) buildings more attractive to people wanting to live downtown but may not be able to afford some of the nicer buildings. My theory, or perhaps expectation, is that some owners may have less incentive to spend money on their buildings. They're going to get tenants no matter what.

 

That is probably true. But there were a couple buildings that had a poor reputation when I was looking for a place downtown. Whether real or just perceived, the Chesterfield was one of them. We hear how vacancy downtown is <5%. In reality, the newer buildings are 100% full. Some of the older, more neglected buildings likely have more empty units.

 

They appear to be charging an average rate of under $1 per square foot.

 

At $0.95 per square foot, they'd be making around $270,655 a year on rent.

At $1.50 per square foot, they'd be making around $427,350 a year on rent.

 

After 10 years they'd make an additional $46,000 for every 700 square feet of apartment space.

 

I would think any apartment owner would be interested in making that investment, even if its one unit at a time.

 

They appear to be charging an average rate of under $1 per square foot.

 

At $0.95 per square foot, they'd be making around $270,655 a year on rent.

At $1.50 per square foot, they'd be making around $427,350 a year on rent.

 

After 10 years they'd make an additional $46,000 for every 700 square feet of apartment space.

 

I would think any apartment owner would be interested in making that investment, even if its one unit at a time.

 

 

Yet the shortsightedness of many a building owner never ceases to amaze me.

Good news... That stretch of 12th has very poor curb appeal. Hopefully this will make it a nicer walk. With Perk Plaza right there and Playhouse Sq just down the street the Chesterfield needs to improve...

Two small updates....work began on the Creswell Building on Huron behind the Wyndham. Also the Chesterfield is being renovated and re-branded as "Sphere." The sign on the building was vague it just indicated the building will be undergoing a renovation.

I was curious if we were going to start seeing the older properties spruce up. The couple times I've been in Chesterfield, it wasn't the nicest place I've seen.

If they want to remain competitive, they have no choice.  Until now, most, residential growth has been WEST of E. Ninth.  With housing now creeping east, older buildings have to spend some money to remain relevant.  I honestly believe the biggest area for now housing could be Payne/Superior in the mid teens and the area south of Playhouse Square.

WSJ Mansion ‏@WSJRealEstate  2h

LeBron's coming back and so is Cleveland's downtown. A look at the growth of the city: http://on.wsj.com/1or5gpf 

Good article, pretty balanced.

Stonebridge has a concierge?

 

Stonebridge has a concierge?

 

 

Won't be able to afford it after the lawsuit settlement is paid! :)

^Isn't the settlement being paid to the building (i.e., the unit owners)?

^Isn't the settlement being paid to the building (i.e., the unit owners)?

 

Don't bother me with trifles!!

WSJ Mansion ‏@WSJRealEstate  2h

LeBron's coming back and so is Cleveland's downtown. A look at the growth of the city: http://on.wsj.com/1or5gpf 

 

And to keep the vibe going from the above article.....

 

Wall Street Journal says it's getting hotter in Cleveland, but we already knew that

By Amanda Harnocz, Northeast Ohio Media Group

on August 29, 2014 at 2:35 PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio — The Wall Street Journal recently posted a story saying that Cleveland should no longer be synonymous with crime, corruption and pollution but words like hip and optimism.

 

With the Republican National Convention coming to town in 2016, LeBron James making his return to the Cavaliers, the Browns drafting Johnny Manziel, a population boom downtown and countless new restaurants and revitalized neighborhoods ... Cleveland is hardly the "Mistake on the Lake."

 

The story focuses heavily on the residential market.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/interact/2014/08/wall_street_journal_says_its_g.html

As promised (and as reported in a WSJ article from earlier in the summer), K&D is selling suburban assets to raise capital for downtown development:

 

K&D Group sells three apartment complexes

By STAN BULLARD

September 02, 2014 11:30 AM

 

K&D Group has sold three apartment complexes with a total of about 800 suites to two buyers in what Doug Price, K&D’s CEO, described as “clearing the decks” for new developments by the Willoughby-based company.

 

Roco Real Estate of Bloomfield Hills, Mich., acquired from K&D the 399-unit Loganberry Ridge Apartments, 26720 Whiteway Ridge in Richmond Heights, and the 300-unit Parkside Gardens Apartments, 1557 Knuth Ave. in Euclid. Roco previously owned two small apartment complexes in Shaker Heights, and it owns an apartment complex in Dublin, Ohio.

 

Meantime, the seven-story building known as Breakwater Apartments, 14100 Lake Shore Boulevard, Cleveland, was acquired by BTA LLC, which became a property of River Capital, a Wadsworth-based apartment investment and management group.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140902/FREE/140909975/kd-group-sells-three-apartment-complexes

Imagine if one-fifth of all housing units in Cleveland were downtown.... The population of downtown would be 80,000 -- not 12,000 to 15,000! Hey, having just 10 percent of Cleveland's housing in downtown would make it a completely different place.....

 

American Planning ‏@APA_Planning  14m

Since 1999, Downtown LA, just 5 sq. miles & barely 1% of total area, has built a fifth of all housing in Los Angeles: http://tinyurl.com/l756yke

Imagine if one-fifth of all housing units in Cleveland were downtown.... The population of downtown would be 80,000 -- not 12,000 to 15,000! Hey, having just 10 percent of Cleveland's housing in downtown would make it a completely different place.....

 

We haven't even gotten started on any serious lakefront residential. When we do that could spur tons of interest in downtown living.

 

^^Actually, that Tweet is about the share of recent residential development in LA, not all units, and by that measure I bet we're doing pretty well.  Of course, the level of overall residential development in Cleveland is pretty low... 

^^Actually, that Tweet is about the share of recent residential development in LA, not all units, and by that measure I bet we're doing pretty well.  Of course, the level of overall residential development in Cleveland is pretty low... 

 

Still, I've often heard from urban policy wonks that it's desirable to have 10% of your city's population living downtown. Civic leaders may want 25,000 people living in downtown Cleveland. Kansas City officials are shooting for 40,000. I think that's what we should be shooting for, too.

Imagine if one-fifth of all housing units in Cleveland were downtown.... The population of downtown would be 80,000 -- not 12,000 to 15,000! Hey, having just 10 percent of Cleveland's housing in downtown would make it a completely different place.....

 

American Planning ‏@APA_Planning  14m

Since 1999, Downtown LA, just 5 sq. miles & barely 1% of total area, has built a fifth of all housing in Los Angeles: http://tinyurl.com/l756yke

 

5 square miles is huge.  For comparison, in Cleveland, 5.2 square miles would be all of downtown, everything east to E. 55th from Woodland up to the lake, and all of Ohio City from the lake west to W. 45th south to I-90.

5 square miles is huge.  For comparison, in Cleveland, 5.2 square miles would be all of downtown, everything east to E. 55th from Woodland up to the lake, and all of Ohio City from the lake west to W. 45th south to I-90.

 

Lakewood is also about 5 square miles with 50,000 people. So among Ohio City, Tremont, downtown, Asiatown and Central, that's about 40,000 people. Adding another 10,000 (the city's stated goal) to that would make a nice difference. Adding 20,000 or 30,000 to that would be a huge difference!

Imagine if one-fifth of all housing units in Cleveland were downtown.... The population of downtown would be 80,000 -- not 12,000 to 15,000! Hey, having just 10 percent of Cleveland's housing in downtown would make it a completely different place.....

 

American Planning ‏@APA_Planning  14m

Since 1999, Downtown LA, just 5 sq. miles & barely 1% of total area, has built a fifth of all housing in Los Angeles: http://tinyurl.com/l756yke

 

In LA, it's one fifth of NEW residential construction that has occurred in downtown since 1999.  I wouldn't be surprised if the same, if not more we're true for Cleveland.

That would be an interesting thing to research to see what the numbers are.

That would be an interesting thing to research to see what the numbers are.

 

Is there a place we can find housing-start data with a geographic variable?

I turned an earlier post of mine from this thread into a blog post.....

 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2014

Cleveland's urban core only starting to reawaken

By Ken Prendergast

 

CLEVELAND – To anyone who follows real estate development news closely, you are allowed to be surprised by the scale and intensity of development occurring in the cores of our largest cities. And one of the biggest turnarounds anywhere in the USA is occurring in Cleveland.

 

What's even more amazing is that we're just starting a potentially major shift in housing and lifestyle choices to one that is decidedly more urban. True, Cleveland is jumping into it in a big way as you probably have noticed and which I will soon describe. But Cleveland has only scratched the surface on tapping a market that is in transition.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2014/09/clevelands-urban-core-only-starting-to.html

 

Usually, vacant buildings in need of change are targeted for this purpose. More recently, however, even those buildings with office tenants are being adapted or proposed for residential. This is a big difference. Now, residential is trumping office space, potentially pushing out office tenants in exchange for residents. At the Tower at Erieview, 10 floors of office space are currently being proposed to be converted. That building joins the Halle Building, Standard Building and The Residences at 1717

 

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/commercialrealestateheatcheck092514.aspx

 

That's news to me.  Has this been discussed where 10 floors in Erieview would be converted to residential?

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

^^Wow, interesting, hadn't heard that.  Presumably, that conversion wouldn't be influenced at all by the state tax credits,* so I wouldn't really object.  Some pretty nice views from up there, plus direct access to the new Y in the Galleria.

 

EDIT: *Maybe I shouldn't be so quick to presume, but I'm too lazy to look up the construction date and eligibility requirements, or to think through the practicalitie here.

 

Usually, vacant buildings in need of change are targeted for this purpose. More recently, however, even those buildings with office tenants are being adapted or proposed for residential. This is a big difference. Now, residential is trumping office space, potentially pushing out office tenants in exchange for residents. At the Tower at Erieview, 10 floors of office space are currently being proposed to be converted. That building joins the Halle Building, Standard Building and The Residences at 1717

 

And the Leader Building, 925 Euclid, 75 Public Square, the Marion Building and probably a few others I'm forgetting. All of these still have office users in them.

 

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

 

I hear ya -- unless there are different banks of elevators or even different elevator lobbies.

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

I've never lived in a mixed use building so I can not comment on that.  However, I struggle with the idea of living in a modern office highrise that was converted to residential. 

^^Erieview Tower does have separate elevator banks

 

^I assume you mean while it is still being used as an office too?  I have no qualms with converting office into residential, so long as the entire building, except the first two or three floors at most, is converted to residential.  I can't think of many such mixed uses in Cleveland.  Bradley Building in the WHD?

^Not sure I understand, why would you have any qualms about a building you'll probably never live in?  Are you worried it would fail and damage the market?  Or do you just mean you personally wouldn't be interested in living in such a building?

I live in a building that is a hotel, apartments, and offices.  It's quite nice.

^Not sure I understand, why would you have any qualms about a building you'll probably never live in?  Are you worried it would fail and damage the market?  Or do you just mean you personally wouldn't be interested in living in such a building?

 

I comment on the design and functionality of a lot of places I would never live in.  But, yes, I would probably not want to live or work in a building where people in suits share elevators and common areas with people who are in their PJs or bathrobes.  I have no opinion on what others might think or its effect on the market.

 

Usually, vacant buildings in need of change are targeted for this purpose. More recently, however, even those buildings with office tenants are being adapted or proposed for residential. This is a big difference. Now, residential is trumping office space, potentially pushing out office tenants in exchange for residents. At the Tower at Erieview, 10 floors of office space are currently being proposed to be converted. That building joins the Halle Building, Standard Building and The Residences at 1717

 

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/commercialrealestateheatcheck092514.aspx

 

That's news to me.  Has this been discussed where 10 floors in Erieview would be converted to residential?

It was hinted at in one of the YMCA articles.

^^Erieview Tower does have separate elevator banks

 

^I assume you mean while it is still being used as an office too?  I have no qualms with converting office into residential, so long as the entire building, except the first two or three floors at most, is converted to residential.  I can't think of many such mixed uses in Cleveland.  Bradley Building in the WHD?

I've mentioned it in the "9" thread.  I would just have issues living in a building with windows that didn't open, no balconies, and a door that goes to a hallway.  Zero access to the outside air would drive me nuts. 

^Not sure I understand, why would you have any qualms about a building you'll probably never live in?  Are you worried it would fail and damage the market?  Or do you just mean you personally wouldn't be interested in living in such a building?

 

I comment on the design and functionality of a lot of places I would never live in.  But, yes, I would probably not want to live or work in a building where people in suits share elevators and common areas with people who are in their PJs or bathrobes.  I have no opinion on what others might think or its effect on the market.

I stay in a hotel in Philly sometimes where the hotel lobby is on the 10th floor with the hotel rooms above that.  The residences are on the bottom 9 floors.  It works well.  But I do get your point in the other circumstances. 

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

I've never lived in a mixed use building so I can not comment on that.  However, I struggle with the idea of living in a modern office highrise that was converted to residential. 

 

I've worked in the Galleria and though I'd miss open windows, I'd live there in a heartbeat. The views of the lake and city are amazing and would make up for the negatives.

 

Plus I like the idea of mixed use, it just makes for a more 24/7 livelier neighborhood.

^ Oye, I'm not looking forward to the winter.

It's been my experience that nearly every downtown building (at least recent conversions or buildings I've been in) do not have windows that open.

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

 

AMEN to that.

If it brings "Top of the Town" back, I'm all for it.  Generally, I'm not in favor of office towers being partially converted to residential.  I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I even have some hesitancy about mixing up hotels and residences.

I've never lived in a mixed use building so I can not comment on that.  However, I struggle with the idea of living in a modern office highrise that was converted to residential. 

 

I've worked in the Galleria and though I'd miss open windows, I'd live there in a heartbeat. The views of the lake and city are amazing and would make up for the negatives.

 

Plus I like the idea of mixed use, it just makes for a more 24/7 livelier neighborhood.

 

All those parking lots should be midrise residencies.

 

This is nothing new, 2 Liberty Place in Philadelphia did this.  They lost tenants in the recession and converted a good portion of the 2nd tower to residential.