45 minutes ago, GISguy said:

Semantics, but those aren't Air Right Parcels in the traditional sense, without getting into the deed, I'd guess these parcels in question have an easement for the RTA going through, but are still the same parcel. I don't mean to be coming off like a jerk but here's a breakdown of county parcel numbers: 

 

 

Either way, it's an interesting strip of parcels! Curious what they'd be able to fit in. 

 

 

Not jerk at all. Very informative. BTW, only 300 traditional land parcels in Cuyahoga County?

 

22 minutes ago, Foraker said:

If you could somehow work with or buy out the owner of the adjacent '007 parcel, you could really do something transformative on that site.

 

10131007 is First Energy's Horizon substation, 2325 Canal Rd.

http://www.usa.com/frs/cleveland-illuminating-co-horizon-substation.html

 

Relocating it would be very expensive. Not impossible. Just expensive. Perhaps it, Cleveland Thermal, and GCRTA's Rail Division electrical substation (just northwest of First Energy) could all be consolidated on the same property someday?

Edited July 2, 20195 yr by KJP

^I think those refer to just the last three numbers, so the system contemplates no more than 300 land parcels within any one tax block. 

54 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Not jerk at all. Very informative. BTW, only 300 traditional land parcels in Cuyahoga County?

 

 

 

Whoever came up with the system assumed that on one book and page (eg., xxx-xx-100) there'd only be 300 total 'traditional land' parcels. While this is true for a lot of suburban builds, but it gets trickier in the city or areas that are undergoing intense subdivision (mostly outskirts at this point). Add to that that parcel numbers are no longer recycled (eg, a parcel is split (123-45-001) and becomes 123-45-002 and 123-45-003, and then is further subdivided with sequential numbers) and 300 will probably end up being low. 

 

The system isn't perfect (I'm not sure when they started going by this standard) which is why you'll see some outliers, but another hint in the county viewer for air rights is there's a slightly different symbology for air parcels (dashed line) and the information when you click on it in the viewer should note that it's an AR parcel. The nature of the viewer doesn't do any favors when they're stacked (think Tower City), likewise condo points are jumbled too on larger buildings. 

 

This is way off topic, but just a bit of insight into parcels, hope this helps a bit!

 

With that I think I just outed where I work lol

Edited July 2, 20195 yr by GISguy

2 hours ago, gg707 said:

Assuming it was built in a way that the entrance was onto Ontario or Eagle, I could see a first floor sports bar, with residential above, doing very well in that location.

It doesn't seem like a place anyone would want to live though. Surrounded by roads and far away from stores. I would expect all commercial.

3 hours ago, Cavalier Attitude said:

It doesn't seem like a place anyone would want to live though. Surrounded by roads and far away from stores. I would expect all commercial.

 

As we all know, an area can change a lot over 5-20 years. I don't know what, if anything is planned there. But if it was developed with housing, it would have to be something vertical to offset the site prep costs to build over the RTA tracks. I don't know if Joel Scheer is making any progress with Flats South. But if he is, or someone else takes over for him if he can't, that site isn't going to be so remote. For the time being, a high-rise built there, with great views, a nice rooftop patio, residents' theater, a coffee shop and a heated parking garage will satisfy a large percentage of the urban-curious population.

It wouldn't be my top location for downtown, but a vertical residential building would have great views of the river/flats, and potentially into Progressive Field.  It would also be the shortest walk/bike ride from downtown into Ohio City. 

MLO claims City Hall destroyed property’s value. 

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2019/07/lawsuit-seeks-115m-claiming-cleveland-destroyed-propertys-value-when-old-street-became-a-park.html

Edited July 19, 20195 yr by Cleveland Trust

7 minutes ago, Cleveland Trust said:

MLO claims City Hall destroyed property’s value. 

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2019/07/lawsuit-seeks-115m-claiming-cleveland-destroyed-propertys-value-when-old-street-became-a-park.html

Does seem the City “oopsed” on that one, but you gotta question—how is it that even the sleuths on UO haven’t heard anything about these ‘discussions’?

 

“The property has been subject of several efforts to develop it from raw land to hotel, commercial and residential uses. Such development is attractive because of the extraordinary strategic location of the property,” the lawsuit states.

15 minutes ago, Clevecane said:

Does seem the City “oopsed” on that one, but you gotta question—how is it that even the sleuths on UO haven’t heard anything about these ‘discussions’?

 

“The property has been subject of several efforts to develop it from raw land to hotel, commercial and residential uses. Such development is attractive because of the extraordinary strategic location of the property,” the lawsuit states.

Yes, city hall lacks transparency on many development issues that make no econmic sense. Hope they can produce those records to support their claim.

 

“Cleveland.com conducted its own search of records of City Council actions and found no legislation vacating Old Ontario.”

 

Oh.

1 hour ago, Clevecane said:

Does seem the City “oopsed” on that one, but you gotta question—how is it that even the sleuths on UO haven’t heard anything about these ‘discussions’?

 

“The property has been subject of several efforts to develop it from raw land to hotel, commercial and residential uses. Such development is attractive because of the extraordinary strategic location of the property,” the lawsuit states.

The last proposal I recall was probably over a decade ago - can't find any images for it, but it was an unremarkable 3-4 story office building with a triangular footprint and curved roof.

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

3 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

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

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

This is ridiculous and screams completely as nothing more than a grab for money. The basis if that the city took away access to these parcels. Looking on Myplace, this group of parcels can be accessed as easily from Canal Rd as they could have been from Old Ontario. I'd like to see that fact brought up in court, but I'm sure there will be some sort of settlement beforehand, with the city likely buying the parcels for inflated prices.

10 hours ago, PoshSteve said:

This is ridiculous and screams completely as nothing more than a grab for money. The basis if that the city took away access to these parcels. Looking on Myplace, this group of parcels can be accessed as easily from Canal Rd as they could have been from Old Ontario. I'd like to see that fact brought up in court, but I'm sure there will be some sort of settlement beforehand, with the city likely buying the parcels for inflated prices.

The dollar amount seems high since there was no development proposal in place. Looks like they want to negotiate a settlement. 

 

They may be pouncing on an opportunity presented because the city did not follow procedure. But it appears the city did not follow procedure. 

On 7/19/2019 at 6:57 PM, PoshSteve said:

This is ridiculous and screams completely as nothing more than a grab for money. The basis if that the city took away access to these parcels. Looking on Myplace, this group of parcels can be accessed as easily from Canal Rd as they could have been from Old Ontario. I'd like to see that fact brought up in court, but I'm sure there will be some sort of settlement beforehand, with the city likely buying the parcels for inflated prices.

 

On 7/20/2019 at 5:15 AM, Cleveland Trust said:

The dollar amount seems high since there was no development proposal in place. Looks like they want to negotiate a settlement. 

 

They may be pouncing on an opportunity presented because the city did not follow procedure. But it appears the city did not follow procedure. 

And I don't recall there being a curb cut from their property onto Old Ontario St. and I don't see it in historical aerials. So, not sure how the removal of Old Ontario renders their property inaccessible now. But yeah, looks like the city messed up by not following procedure and these owners are taking advantage.

Panini's closed suddenly.  https://www.cleveland19.com/2019/07/29/paninis-bar-grill-prospect-ontario-cleveland-closes/?fbclid=IwAR1O0hipj2RPBHlaLVHWXgQcWka4rLj3krP5zXjaFapexxBJDtnXOwWZDdo

1 hour ago, pgn711 said:

Panini's closed suddenly.  https://www.cleveland19.com/2019/07/29/paninis-bar-grill-prospect-ontario-cleveland-closes/?fbclid=IwAR1O0hipj2RPBHlaLVHWXgQcWka4rLj3krP5zXjaFapexxBJDtnXOwWZDdo

Clearing room for Target? ?

4 hours ago, Clevecane said:

Clearing room for Target? ?

The other paninis was like right down the street and they never closed that one. What did they expect to happen?

That’s a prime spot. Wouldn’t expect it to be vacant very long. 

It was always complete opposite ends of the spectrum with Tilted Kilt / Panini's.  On days there was a game or concert the place could be packed.  But was in there a few times when no event was going on downtown and there were literally 2 customers in the place.  Some of that is a part of being a downtown bar / restaurant.  But I'm sure the slow days really hurt their bottom line.  Hopefully something decent comes in there next and is able to last!!

On 7/29/2019 at 6:05 AM, KFM44107 said:

The other paninis was like right down the street and they never closed that one. What did they expect to happen?

 It’s open right now. Just walked past and it’s full of people pre-gaming. 

Downtown/Flats Design Review Case Report

 

310 PROSPECT AVE DEMOLITION

Return to Case List | Start Over | Print Report (PDF format)

Project Information

Downtown/Flats Case #  DF 2019-064

Address:310 Prospect Ave.

Company:B&B Wrecking

Architect:NA | B&B Wrecking

Description:

The complete demolition of an existing vacant building.

Notes: 

Building is within a National Historic District and is a designated National Historical Landmark.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3284&CASE=DF 2019-064

On 8/3/2019 at 5:37 PM, Clefan98 said:

Downtown/Flats Design Review Case Report

 

310 PROSPECT AVE DEMOLITION

Return to Case List | Start Over | Print Report (PDF format)

Project Information

Downtown/Flats Case #  DF 2019-064

Address:310 Prospect Ave.

Company:B&B Wrecking

Architect:NA | B&B Wrecking

Description:

The complete demolition of an existing vacant building.

Notes: 

Building is within a National Historic District and is a designated National Historical Landmark.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3284&CASE=DF 2019-064

??

B&B is currently on-site so I'm assuming this got rubber stamped.  Unfortunate.

8 minutes ago, sizzlinbeef said:

B&B is currently on-site so I'm assuming this got rubber stamped.  Unfortunate.

 

That's unfortunate. The request hasn't even gone through the landmark commission yet. I wonder if they'll call this an "emergency demolition order" by calling it a safety hazard.

Is this the one that will yield surface parking? if it is - that's a shame.  But in my 29 years, I can't recall there ever being anything there.  Any history of that building?

On 7/29/2019 at 7:33 AM, marty15 said:

That’s a prime spot. Wouldn’t expect it to be vacant very long. 

Still seems odd they would spend all that money rebranding and re-signing just to close?  I just walked by there and that entire area of Ontario between Public Square and Prospect is a mess... between all the vacant storefronts it is dirty, smelly, and unappealing to walk through.  The May Company Building will help a lot but I wish they would do something and clean up the area.  The trees in front of the Casino Parking Building (Whalburgers) are all dead, some are just snapped off- the streetlights are broken... its in a sad state.  You'd think Bedrock would want to spruce things up.

3 hours ago, RE Developer In Training said:

Is this the one that will yield surface parking? if it is - that's a shame.  But in my 29 years, I can't recall there ever being anything there.  Any history of that building?

 

Built in 1906, the Herold Building has an unusual facade covered with black glass panels. Those panels, added in 1948, reflect a building modernization trend that swept the nation in the 1930s and 1940s. The former home of Kurtz Furniture, the Clock Restaurant and Downtown Eddie's, the building has been empty for years.

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2013/08/city_lawsuit_over_downtown_cle.html

Cross posting from the demo watch thread.

 

I'm surprised it hasn't seen an article from Cleveland.com or others. There was quite the kerfuffle when the parking lot operator tried tearing this down some years ago. It went before design review earlier today. I wonder how that went.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2019/08162019/DF-DRAC-agenda-8-15-19.pdf

 

Project: DF2019-064: 310 Prospect Ave. Demolition

 * The proposed complete demolition of an existing vacant building.

Project Address: 310 Prospect Ave.

Project Representative: Courtney Ray, B&B Wrecking

 

Tons of pictures on the CPC website, oddly enough many of them taken 2012.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2019/08162019/index.php

 

 

^ Wow, that's a busy agenda..

Tabled at design review on Thursday. No telling what happened today at the planning commission.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3284&CASE=DF 2019-064

 

Date: August 15, 2019

Committee: Local Design Review Committee

Action Type: Tabled

Conditions: 

 

Edited August 16, 20195 yr by Mendo

This building needs to be saved. 

5 hours ago, marty15 said:

This building needs to be saved. 

I would love for the Alto Partners ( Euclid Grand  Developers ) also known as the

John Hartness Brown Building to buy and rehab this building.  I wish there was

a way to get Stark & Alto in the same room.

Alto is working on something for 55 Erieview as its next Cleveland project.

9 minutes ago, KJP said:

Alto is working on something for 55 Erieview as its next Cleveland project.

I am aware of 55Erieview.  Sure would be nice if they could get 310 Prospect.

I would feel comfortable that they could salvage this bulding

2 hours ago, simplythis said:

I would love for the Alto Partners ( Euclid Grand  Developers ) also known as the

John Hartness Brown Building to buy and rehab this building.  I wish there was

a way to get Stark & Alto in the same room.

If I recall correctly @w28th mentioned a few weeks ago that Stark in the past had tried to sell 310 and was simply asking an unreasonable amount for the building given its structural issues.

 

Edited August 17, 20195 yr by Htsguy

Any rumblings of things going on in the space below the parking deck across from the UCC on Prospect? Restock closed probably two months ago, and just noticed Cash Stop has closed recently too. It's not the most appealing space but kind of weird two tenants are gonezo, especially the Cashstop, unfortunately that place seemed busy all the time. 

2 hours ago, GISguy said:

Any rumblings of things going on in the space below the parking deck across from the UCC on Prospect? Restock closed probably two months ago, and just noticed Cash Stop has closed recently too. It's not the most appealing space but kind of weird two tenants are gonezo, especially the Cashstop, unfortunately that place seemed busy all the time. 

Not sure that Cash Stop catered to the best clientele. But then again, that part of Prospect has been in desperate need of improvement for decades.

Downtown/Flats Case #  DF 2019-071

Address:651 Huron Rd.

Company:WHHotel

Architect:Kraemer Design Group | WHIConstruction Management

Description:

The proposed renovation of an existing 8 story hotel and adjacent building.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/brd/detailDR.php?ID=3333&CASE=DF 2019-071

will this stay a hotel or is being converted to residential units?

 

6 minutes ago, G00pie said:

will this stay a hotel or is being converted to residential units?

 

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/glenmont-acquires-downtown-cleveland-hotel-to-be-rebranded-to-a-boutique-hotel-indigo-after-a-comprehensive-7-million-renovation-2019-03-11

This is great to see.  Is this the hotel that is using opportunity zone funding?  

7 hours ago, Mendo said:

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/glenmont-acquires-downtown-cleveland-hotel-to-be-rebranded-to-a-boutique-hotel-indigo-after-a-comprehensive-7-million-renovation-2019-03-11

Thank you very much Mendo

12 hours ago, Mendo said:

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/glenmont-acquires-downtown-cleveland-hotel-to-be-rebranded-to-a-boutique-hotel-indigo-after-a-comprehensive-7-million-renovation-2019-03-11

 

Hotel Indigo properties are not "boutique" nor an "an upper upscale branded" property.  Who is this clown that wrote this?  If this was a boutique property, they would spend more than 7 million to rebrand.

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by MyTwoSense

1 hour ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Hotel Indigo properties are not "boutique" nor an "an upper upscale branded" property.  Who is this clown that wrote this?  If this was a boutique property, they would spend more than 7 million to rebrand.

And it would be a Kimpton. Still good to see some investment in this hotel. Maybe if it’s successful, IHG will bring in a Kimpton. ?

I like Hotel Indigo. I’d put them in the same category as Aloft. It’s a definite improvement over Radisson. 

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by marty15

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 10:03 AM, RE Developer In Training said:

This is great to see.  Is this the hotel that is using opportunity zone funding?  

It is certainly within an opportunity zone, as is all of downtown.  These zones are a complete joke.  In Cleveland, basically all the hot neighborhoods (which were hot before the zones existed) are in the zone, and distressed areas are not.  For instance, all of Tremont is in, but Clark-Fulton is out.   The Clinic and University Circle are in, but Hough is out.  It is pretty apparent that these zones simply provide an "opportunity" to line developers (and their investors) pockets with huge tax savings on investments that could or would have been made anyway.  While an argument could be made that supercharging high-end developments helps provide some "opportunity," this very costly program certainly wasn't pitched on the basis of temporary construction work and a few maids to clean up thereafter.  

It's not as clear cut as that- the Opportunity Zones are a mix of "hot" neighborhoods and "forgotten" ones.  Tremont is in, but Detroit-Shoreway is out.  Hough is out, but Fairfax and much of the "Forgotten Triangle" is in.  If anything the Opportunity Zones seem to track the city's commercial areas- Downtown, Midtown, the Flats, University Circle, the industrial areas around E. 79th, the Lakefront,  but they are laid out along the lines of census tracts, which go by population so the match isn't very easy to make.

Perhaps these past few posts belong in an OZ thread, BUT here's a breakdown of Opportunity Zones in Cleveland: https://www.opportunitycle.com/district-index

 

 

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by GISguy

https://development.ohio.gov/bs/bs_censustracts.htm

 

Map with street overlays.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/31/business/tax-opportunity-zones.html

 

Edited October 16, 20195 yr by ydard