^I thought Millennia was moving to Key Tower.

 

They must still be in their due diligence period because the deal hasn't closed yet. I'm hoping it happens soon!

Tweet from Michelle today when asked if there were any updates on nuCLEus. Not sure if that means anything.

 

mjarboe[/member]

@leerucker Not yet. Possibly soon.

 

From what I heard they were struggling with their financing.

^Every project (especially in Cleveland as we have seen lately) "struggles" with financing.  That statement means nothing to me without specifics.

^Every project (especially in Cleveland as we have seen lately) "struggles" with financing.  That statement means nothing to me without specifics.

 

Even though the members on this forum are private, it doesn't mean I'd be willing to share specifics of information. Without secrecy there wouldn't exist competition. We all work in the business from what I gather. That's all I can say for now.

I have some chatter info.  I spoke with someone involved in another project. They happened to come across someone involved with the architects involved in the Nucleus project. 

According to that person there is a substantial funding gap. This gap would require Stark to substantially scale back the project. It appears that Stark does not want to scale back

that much. Also, as time goes on Benesch needs to make a decision on their move. The longer this drags on the less chance they will committ because of their lease. This person involved with the architects feels that this project will not happen. This project needs to scale back & start construction soon.

Interesting.  I suspect Stark wants to show to lenders the success of The Beacon. If it fills as quickly as The 9 did, lenders may be more generous. Problem is the timing may not work in his favor. Benesch can't wait much longer. I wonder what their drop-dead date is? If Benesch doesn't go into nuCLEus, where would they go? I hope Stark scales back. I'd rather have two 27-story towers, representing phase 1 and phase 2, than one 54-story tower anyway.

Interesting.  I suspect Stark wants to show to lenders the success of The Beacon. If it fills as quickly as The 9 did, lenders may be more generous. Problem is the timing may not work in his favor. Benesch can't wait much longer. I wonder what their drop-dead date is? If Benesch doesn't go into nuCLEus, where would they go? I hope Stark scales back. I'd rather have two 27-story towers, representing phase 1 and phase 2, than one 54-story tower anyway.

 

Agreed. The feature I'm most excited for with Nucleus is the potential street impact it will have with the alley and retail factors. Although having another 50+ floor tower would be amazing, I would much rather see a focus on getting it done and adding to the vibrancy of the area.

I know Benesch is the prime target-tenant Stark is negotiating with but, not to put the cart before the horse by presuming any Stark-Benesch is dead because all we have is hearsay at this point, I'm just wondering whether there could/should be other law firms of Benesch's size and prestige that could step into a deal should Benesch feel trapped in limbo viz Stark's financing negotiation/design disagreement.  As we know, Cleveland has been/is home to a variety of law firms including Jones Day, and Squires, which are 2 of the largest and most prestigious in the country -- among many others.

We are all quick to jump on developers when a project falls behind schedule, and sometimes, it is a direct result of their ineptitude, but often times, the lenders are just plain stingy. What frustrates me more than anything is that locally, our lenders will finance the construction of $4-$500,000 single family homes on the near westside, but they are scared to death to finance new construction mixed use downtown. And nationally, the lenders who would finance such a project focus mostly the big name cities.

 

It's like we are trapped in the twilight zone even with proven demand. I mean, how high do our rents have to get before they start handing out money? Just very frustrating.

^It seems as though banks are leery of downtown in general.  With all of the pent-up demand for housing, you would think banks would jump on new construction.  Multiple new construction projects have been financed in University Circle... nothing downtown.  Even with occupancy at over 90% for a few years now.

You guys tell us not to jump on Stark but then assume it's all about the financing. The lenders may be weary because Stark can't line up any retailers. Or maybe there is an issue how Stark wants the project financed. Or there could be a third party involved that is slowing things down. The one truth about this project is that we don't know why it's not moving forward.

 

I still believe his aggressive deadline schedule from the beginning was a message for someone. Not quite sure who. That being said people have every right to be skeptical of Stark. He's track record shows he's great at delivering something in Westlake, not so much downtown.

^I don't like it, but in part, can understand it.  Cleveland has gone from zero-to-60 mph in 5 seconds... Less than a decade ago, when Euclid was torn up for ECP/BRT, downtown was a dead-as-a-doornail ghost town where there was only minimal activity along E. 4th Street where Corner Alley had just gone in... Obviously in the short time since then downtown has done extremely well with office building adaptive reuse conversions -- to the extent there really isn't much left.  We still haven't proven to the banks that we can build/sustain large scale new construction... downtown or elsewhere within city borders.  But we're getting there, esp in University Circle.  Downtown we have FEB, Avenue District (condos that have struggled), and, soon, Beacon.  Obviously Weston and NuCLEus would go a long way, but I understand the caution ... even though I don't necessarily like it.

You guys tell us not to jump on Stark but then assume it's all about the financing. The lenders may be weary because Stark can't line up any retailers. Or maybe there is an issue how Stark wants the project financed. Or there could be a third party involved that is slowing things down. The one truth about this project is that we don't know why it's not moving forward.

 

I still believe his aggressive deadline schedule from the beginning was a message for someone. Not quite sure who. That being said people have every right to be skeptical of Stark. He's track record shows he's great at delivering something in Westlake, not so much downtown.

 

... which is why, at the very least, I want Beacon to get going.  At least this would get Stark off the downtown schnide. 

The information available is that financiers are leery of investing in new-construction residential in downtown Cleveland. Why is that a surprise? Remember the skepticism that Fred Geis displayed when asked about what he thought of anyone attempting a new-build apartment tower downtown? He's not the only one. How's Forest City's latest new-construction projects in Cleveland progressing? And if we're going to question Stark's inability achieve progress on a 54-story mixed-use tower, shouldn't we also get on Fairmount's back about not being able to start construction of a comparatively diminutive 11-story residential tower atop a retail pad on Flats East Bank?

^I don't like it, but in part, can understand it.  Cleveland has gone from zero-to-60 mph in 5 seconds... Less than a decade ago, when Euclid was torn up for ECP/BRT, downtown was a dead-as-a-doornail ghost town where there was only minimal activity along E. 4th Street where Corner Alley had just gone in... Obviously in the short time since then downtown has done extremely well with office building adaptive reuse conversions -- to the extent there really isn't much left.  We still haven't proven to the banks that we can build/sustain large scale new construction... downtown or elsewhere within city borders.  But we're getting there, esp in University Circle.  Downtown we have FEB, Avenue District (condos that have struggled), and, soon, Beacon.  Obviously Weston and NuCLEus would go a long way, but I understand the caution ... even though I don't necessarily like it.

 

Despite all the office adaptive reuse, the office market in Cleveland still remains pretty soft. My (and others) argument for a more vibrant downtown has been an aggressive mechanism to create jobs in the region. When jobs are mentioned we get into the "Cleveland is in transition" argument. It's a fine point but then don't expect something like this project to come on-line quickly or possibly ever. The are plenty of North American markets creating more jobs and office/retail/housing demand than the Cleveland area. One is more likely to invest somewhere where the market is stronger to get a quicker ROI. It is what it is.

The information available is that financiers are leery of investing in new-construction residential in downtown Cleveland. Why is that a surprise? Remember the skepticism that Fred Geis displayed when asked about what he thought of anyone attempting a new-build apartment tower downtown? He's not the only one. How's Forest City's latest new-construction projects in Cleveland progressing? And if we're going to question Stark's inability achieve progress on a 54-story mixed-use tower, shouldn't we also get on Fairmount's back about not being able to start construction of a comparatively diminutive 11-story residential tower atop a retail pad on Flats East Bank?

 

What info? A second hand conversation. It could very well be true but no facts have been presented towards why there is a delay.

^I don't like it, but in part, can understand it.  Cleveland has gone from zero-to-60 mph in 5 seconds... Less than a decade ago, when Euclid was torn up for ECP/BRT, downtown was a dead-as-a-doornail ghost town where there was only minimal activity along E. 4th Street where Corner Alley had just gone in... Obviously in the short time since then downtown has done extremely well with office building adaptive reuse conversions -- to the extent there really isn't much left.  We still haven't proven to the banks that we can build/sustain large scale new construction... downtown or elsewhere within city borders.  But we're getting there, esp in University Circle.  Downtown we have FEB, Avenue District (condos that have struggled), and, soon, Beacon.  Obviously Weston and NuCLEus would go a long way, but I understand the caution ... even though I don't necessarily like it.

 

If Cleveland did that in five seconds, most cities (including in the Rust Belt) have done it in half the time.  Don't get me wrong, what has happened in Cleveland in the past few years has been very impressive, but what is happening elsewhere will blow Cleveland away.  2005 was quite a while ago when talking about urban development, and you can point to any number of downtowns/city neighborhoods across the country and say the same thing.  This is one of the many reasons why it is so frustrating to get excited about Cleveland any more in development.  Just got back from another trip to Milwaukee, and to see the amount of cranes across the skyline is amazing.  They have already worked on making the pedestrian activity zones thrive, now they're working on their skyline and the massive residential highrises that go with a growing downtown.  Milwaukee has been building residential highrises for several years now.  Beacon still hasn't started, and that's the smallest of the major projects including Weston and NuCLEus.  I know all about the residential conversions right now in Cleveland, but most cities have already been past that, and are now seeing extremely impressive (new construction) projects.  I just think banks are leery of Cleveland (and the rest of Ohio) when it comes to massive projects because they don't see demand for it, or they have performed well below expectations when it comes to demand.  Honestly, I would love to see them happen, but I highly doubt NuCLEus or Weston ever get built.  The Beacon has the best chance, IMO.  All this talk of big Cleveland companies building new highrises just doesn't seem plausible in today's Cleveland; there needs to be a complete change in mindset in the city.

 

It's not about being negative, but Cleveland is seriously failing at doing most anything development-wise compared to just about every major city out there.  I see why people try to be big boosters for Cleveland (the city needs it) and I use to be one of them, but if you do any sort of traveling to major cities, you begin to wonder why Cleveland can't seem to get any type of progressive leadership to make the city competitive.  Not to stray away from NuCLEus, but the original plan is not going to happen.  It would just be nice to see one of the many surface parking lots that scar Cleveland go away.

 

 

What info? A second hand conversation. It could very well be true but no facts have been presented towards why there is a delay.

 

I think you're missing the totality of everything that's being said here in this and other threads. The fact is what MissinOhio just noted -- look at the lack of cranes in our skyline. We're just not building that much in Cleveland compared to other cities. And what we do build here is HEAVILY subsidized if not outright owned by the public-sector.

What info? A second hand conversation. It could very well be true but no facts have been presented towards why there is a delay.

 

I think you're missing the totality of everything that's being said here in this and other threads. The fact is what MissinOhio just noted -- look at the lack of cranes in our skyline. We're just not building that much in Cleveland compared to other cities. And what we do build here is HEAVILY subsidized if not outright owned by the public-sector.

 

Not missing it and even said financing could be the issue. Just like to know the reason from a trusted, fact-verified source. Second hand conversation is great for these threads, no doubt.

This is a risky project and probably oversold at 50+ stories.  I hate to say it but it will likely be scaled back in size and delayed from the spring ground breaking.  Before anyone asks, I don't "KNOW" this.  But i know people who do know, and they tell me it's not a done deal yet.  So experience tells me it's not breaking ground in the next 3 months.

^I don't like it, but in part, can understand it.  Cleveland has gone from zero-to-60 mph in 5 seconds... Less than a decade ago, when Euclid was torn up for ECP/BRT, downtown was a dead-as-a-doornail ghost town where there was only minimal activity along E. 4th Street where Corner Alley had just gone in... Obviously in the short time since then downtown has done extremely well with office building adaptive reuse conversions -- to the extent there really isn't much left.  We still haven't proven to the banks that we can build/sustain large scale new construction... downtown or elsewhere within city borders.  But we're getting there, esp in University Circle.  Downtown we have FEB, Avenue District (condos that have struggled), and, soon, Beacon.  Obviously Weston and NuCLEus would go a long way, but I understand the caution ... even though I don't necessarily like it.

 

If Cleveland did that in five seconds, most cities (including in the Rust Belt) have done it in half the time.  Don't get me wrong, what has happened in Cleveland in the past few years has been very impressive, but what is happening elsewhere will blow Cleveland away.  2005 was quite a while ago when talking about urban development, and you can point to any number of downtowns/city neighborhoods across the country and say the same thing.  This is one of the many reasons why it is so frustrating to get excited about Cleveland any more in development.  Just got back from another trip to Milwaukee, and to see the amount of cranes across the skyline is amazing.  They have already worked on making the pedestrian activity zones thrive, now they're working on their skyline and the massive residential highrises that go with a growing downtown.  Milwaukee has been building residential highrises for several years now.  Beacon still hasn't started, and that's the smallest of the major projects including Weston and NuCLEus.  I know all about the residential conversions right now in Cleveland, but most cities have already been past that, and are now seeing extremely impressive (new construction) projects.  I just think banks are leery of Cleveland (and the rest of Ohio) when it comes to massive projects because they don't see demand for it, or they have performed well below expectations when it comes to demand.  Honestly, I would love to see them happen, but I highly doubt NuCLEus or Weston ever get built.  The Beacon has the best chance, IMO.  All this talk of big Cleveland companies building new highrises just doesn't seem plausible in today's Cleveland; there needs to be a complete change in mindset in the city.

 

It's not about being negative, but Cleveland is seriously failing at doing most anything development-wise compared to just about every major city out there.  I see why people try to be big boosters for Cleveland (the city needs it) and I use to be one of them, but if you do any sort of traveling to major cities, you begin to wonder why Cleveland can't seem to get any type of progressive leadership to make the city competitive.  Not to stray away from NuCLEus, but the original plan is not going to happen.  It would just be nice to see one of the many surface parking lots that scar Cleveland go away.

 

 

 

But my point is that Cleveland has had to come from much further back than most cities -- including those in the so-called "Rust Belt," so to see what we've done in such short a time is amazing... at least it is, to me.  Milwaukee, which was never the heavy industrial city Cleveland is/was, was never in as bad a shape as Cleveland with our extreme loss of industry and corporate HQ/offices since the 1960s through at least the early 2000s (and still, to some degree, is continuing).  Milwaukee is also in Chicago's massive wake, just 75 miles to the north, and thus it enjoy's many of Chicago's regional privileges...

 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, again much more white collar/less heavy industry, also has had a far superior launching pad than Cleveland... But places like KC, Indy, and even St. Louis don't impress me as exceeding, or even matching Cleveland, building-wise/development-wise in the last decade or so and, again, none of these had experienced the collapse Cleveland had -- not to mention also being ground-zero for the 2008 foreclosure crisis.  Give me downtown Cleveland over any of those places in terms of excitement, culture, architecture, food, activity, sports, transit, etc... Only Detroit has been/is clearly worse off than Cleveland but, of course, Detroit's a larger city in a much larger metro area than Cleveland, and still has much of the powerful auto industry there ... and Dan Gilbert.

 

I'm not saying Cleveland's the be-all, end-all in terms of downtown, close-in neighborhood development, but I am extremely impressed with where we've come, especially given the negativity, skepticism, noncooperation and, flat out, incompetency regarding development that, until recently, was Cleveland's mantra.

Not missing it and even said financing could be the issue. Just like to know the reason from a trusted, fact-verified source. Second hand conversation is great for these threads, no doubt.

 

Of course we all do too. But you also know there are reputable sources here on UO and we learn over time who they are. Just I trust in your aviation news insights and you will hopefully trust in my rail/transit insights, there are people on this forum who I trust when it comes to sharing development insights. And when they share them, in less than a week, the PD or Crain's typically has an article confirming it with more details.

 

So getting back to the point of this thread, I do think Stark's plan is an over-reach. I love his vision, but I'm afraid it's just not realistic at this time. When Geis made his skeptical comment about building high-rise residential downtown, it was actually in reference to Stark's more achievable project -- for The Beacon.  I have to wonder what Geis thinks of Stark's desire to build nuCLEus.... I wish Stark would focus just on The Beacon right now. I think he hurts his credibility in trying to pursue both at the same time. If Beacon succeeds, then I think the next high-rise residential project downtown isn't nuCLEus, but the Playhouse Square tower atop that district's proposed parking garage.

What info? A second hand conversation. It could very well be true but no facts have been presented towards why there is a delay.

 

I think you're missing the totality of everything that's being said here in this and other threads. The fact is what MissinOhio just noted -- look at the lack of cranes in our skyline. We're just not building that much in Cleveland compared to other cities. And what we do build here is HEAVILY subsidized if not outright owned by the public-sector.

 

Ehh, I get what you're saying for some cities in the Midwest, but I don't see putting Cleveland at the bottom for development. I travel quite frequently to most Midwest cities for my work, and I can say from experience that outside of Chicago (obvious), Pittsburgh, and Minneapolis, I am not seeing an exorbitant amount of construction like you say. Taking into account development across the whole city, I think we are right up there with Milwaukee, St Louis, Indy, Cincy, Columbus, etc.

Folks, this is a thread for discussion of the nuCLEus development, not for comparisons of Rust Belt city's comebacks.  Please keep it to the topic.

Anyone hear anything new on Nucleus. http://www.starkenterprises.com/properties/nucleus/

Anyone hear anything new on Nucleus. http://www.starkenterprises.com/properties/nucleus/

 

Nothing encouraging lately, unfortunately.

I hope Stark is willing to cut down this project a little bit if he absolutely has to. I'm okay with a shorter tower and no hotel, as long as he's able to still bring some promising retail and new restaurants to this part of downtown.

$250 million Stark nuCLEus project is stalled, but 'alive'

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20170205/NEWS/170209905/-250-million-stark-nucleus-project-is-stalled-but-alive

 

More than two years after Stark Enterprises and J-Dek Investments lofted plans for a 48-floor downtown Cleveland skyscraper, the site remains a sea of parking lots.

 

 

 

Seems like good news, at least that its still ongoing and not dead, and the mention of leases with specific retailers is a great sign to that.

 

"The final, missing piece? Stark said the project is in negotiations with the city of Cleveland to put in place the public financing portion of the $250 million project."

 

I'm taking this as meaning private financing is all in place. If so that's wonderful! Not surprising that the city would be holding things up

I take Shark's word as far as I would Trump's

 

Anybody in the development field have an idea about the way lenders may view Cleveland if this actually gets off the ground?  Will it be any easier for developers to build new construction housing versus what they're faced with now? 

Anybody have an idea of what Stark is asking for in public financing? Hopefully it is not a Deal Breaker.

Seems like good news, at least that its still ongoing and not dead, and the mention of leases with specific retailers is a great sign to that.

 

"The final, missing piece? Stark said the project is in negotiations with the city of Cleveland to put in place the public financing portion of the $250 million project."

 

I'm taking this as meaning private financing is all in place. If so that's wonderful! Not surprising that the city would be holding things up

 

I'm taking this as meaning he was able to secure SOME private financing and wants the City to step in and fill the financing gap with massive public subsidies..... probably more than what was originally envisioned. 

^Exactly. I wouldn't blame the hold up here on anything the city has or hasn't done. Getting $200 million in private financing is a time consuming process.

This kind of project should get top financing priority.  I would hate to see it not happen just because the city believes it has better investment ideas.  In general I think we've spent enough on downtown, but the retail component of this project could boost all the city's neighborhoods at once.  And we need all the new-build hi-rise housing units we can get.

You have to remember that the city does not have unlimited resources also.  I know for a fact that the city is doing everything that they can on this project.

i wonder if the port authority could help with this?

^My guess is that the Port is already involved in some fashion... they usually play a part in large projects like this.  Beyond the abatement for the residential structure and the TIF which I'm sure has been requested, I wonder what else Stark is looking for from the City. The article mentions "involving the schools", which could be TIF or some other issue regarding property taxes.

This kind of project should get top financing priority.  I would hate to see it not happen just because the city believes it has better investment ideas.  In general I think we've spent enough on downtown, but the retail component of this project could boost all the city's neighborhoods at once.  And we need all the new-build hi-rise housing units we can get.

 

Do you know that it is NOT getting 'top financing priority' from the City?  I am not quite sure what that means, but it certainly can't mean that ALL other investment ideas, such as investment in infrastructure and schools, get scrapped until Stark gets whatever he wants from the City.

From the article:

 

Cleveland city councilman Kerry McCormack, whose Ward 3 includes downtown, said negotiations between the developer and city administration have “gotten sensitive around the schools. Normally with tax increment financing plans, they don’t include funds from the schools (just the city). From what I understand, there are some solutions for the schools, and Stark wants to get creative how it does it.”

 

Based on that, it sounds like the only way to make this particular bond issue work is by diverting future school funding.  That's not something I would rush to approve.  Other forms of funding and support do exist, so one can only assume those have been ruled out.  That's what I was originally getting at.  That, and our city's recent history of official resistance to large-scale development proposals.

 

We aren't being told much here and what we're hearing raises as many questions as it answers.  Everything is speculative right now.

I think the bigger question is why is this project so desperate for financing that discussion of funding from the schools is even on the table.  This seems like more of the same with Stark and his proposals downtown.  Each and every time, he seems to reach too high and it all falls apart for one reason or another.

Stark needs extensive subsidies for constructing a new high-rise downtown. So did the convention center hotel. So did the Ernst & Young Tower at Flats East Bank. Not seeing a big difference here.

 

Even his Beacon Tower got a huge break, above the usual tax abatement and a tax-increment financing district, from a bankruptcy sale in which Harbor Group purchased the 515 Euclid garage for $8.5 million -- but it cost $25 million to build. The dramatically lower financing costs undoubtedly made it possible for Harbor Group to offer the air rights development at a more reasonable rate that could be supported by a new tower, even at Cleveland's low rents.

If you don't reach high you never get anywhere.  Is the Q renovation a reach?  Depends on who you ask, but nobody doubts they'll get what they need.  And we just did the stadium too.  Great gobs of money.  There's always opportunity cost and this city has hardly been austere.  I remember Stark complaining when FEB received the support he wanted for his WHD proposal, he even called FEB the suburbs.  It's nice that he's still trying so hard, isn't it?  He's got gumption. 

If you don't reach high you never get anywhere.  Is the Q renovation a reach?  Depends on who you ask, but nobody doubts they'll get what they need.  And we just did the stadium too.  Great gobs of money.  There's always opportunity cost and this city has hardly been austere.  I remember Stark complaining when FEB received the support he wanted for his WHD proposal, he even called FEB the suburbs.  It's nice that he's still trying so hard, isn't it?  He's got gumption. 

 

Maybe so, but those are the kinds of things con men do.

 

I hope I’m putting aside how much I hate the Jenga tower design, but this is starting to sound like Stark’s trying to make like Trump, be a big shot with OPM.  In this case, the OP is us, the taxpayers.

 

I’m normally a big believer that downtown is the public face of a city and how it’s national and even global image is judged, and therefore focusing on it is fine.  But really, I’m beginning to think there are better places to put public funds, if they must be spent.

Why does Stark need funds from the schools? It's a bit surprising because there's a pretty good possibility most NuCLEus residents with children will likely avoid Cleveland Public Schools anyway. I can understand the city's stance on this one.

If you don't reach high you never get anywhere.  Is the Q renovation a reach?  Depends on who you ask, but nobody doubts they'll get what they need.  And we just did the stadium too.  Great gobs of money.  There's always opportunity cost and this city has hardly been austere.  I remember Stark complaining when FEB received the support he wanted for his WHD proposal, he even called FEB the suburbs.  It's nice that he's still trying so hard, isn't it?  He's got gumption. 

 

Maybe so, but those are the kinds of things con men do.

 

I hope I’m putting aside how much I hate the Jenga tower design, but this is starting to sound like Stark’s trying to make like Trump, be a big shot with OPM.  In this case, the OP is us, the taxpayers.

 

I’m normally a big believer that downtown is the public face of a city and how it’s national and even global image is judged, and therefore focusing on it is fine.  But really, I’m beginning to think there are better places to put public funds, if they must be spent.

 

^ yep, so lets see if he can pull off 515 euclid first. that one is a gimme.

More NuCleUs news...

 

"Cleveland Live! will anchor nuCLEus project retail; Shake Shack, HopCat, Starbucks Reserve sign on"

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/02/cleveland_live_will_anchor_nuc.html#incart_river_home

can someone explain the timing on this?????

"This ambitious project is still years away, if all goes as planned." >>> Cleveland Scene

 

Benesch might actually still be in play. From the sounds of it, they could sign another five-year lease with 200 Public Square before they can even move.

 

Do appreciate the optimism offered in the Cleveland.com piece, though.

More NuCleUs news...

 

"Cleveland Live! will anchor nuCLEus project retail; Shake Shack, HopCat, Starbucks Reserve sign on"

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/02/cleveland_live_will_anchor_nuc.html#incart_river_home

 

"If the project starts this year, it might be open by 2019" is akin too "If the Browns find a QB, they might be in the Super Bowl by 2020".

 

Reads a bit like a real estate fluff piece to me. Surprised it came from Jarboe.