2 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

I haven't been able to find out how much space Benesch currently has. Their lease info, space needs at nuCLEus, and available space at Key is in the article.

 

 

Last number I know is from 2017, when Benesch had over 220 staff and rented four floors (about 120,000 sq. ft.) at 200 Public Square. (See numbered pg. 6 of this appraisal report: https://mayafiles.tase.co.il/rpdf/1086001-1087000/P1086322-01.pdf ) Since then, they've added a decent number of attorneys.

 

Also, as stated above, my information from someone who works at Benesch is that they will be requiring everyone to come in two days a week, and it will be the same two days for everyone. In other words, their long-term space needs should be the same even if they are utilizing work from home, because they (for understandable reasons) want at least a couple days where everybody is in the office.

 

Frankly, if Benesch wants 200,000 sq. ft. (which they had indicated in the past they do), I'm not sure there's ANYWHERE they can get class A office space to fill that need.

My initial thought was that this is a strategy by Stark to try make their TMUD application appear more urgent in order to improve its chances. Anyone else think that?  

5 minutes ago, 3231 said:

My initial thought was that this is a strategy by Stark to try make their TMUD application appear more urgent in order to improve its chances. Anyone else think that?  

 

Thanks @3231. I'm going to steal that for my next article, now under construction.....

I cant understand why this development wouldn't contain any residential component. Considering what MLB wants to see developed around Progressive Field and the existing 4th street environment, there will be high demand in this area for residential options. An office building in the middle of these two districts, that will only be occupied during business hours, doesn't make sense. 

7 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

 

Last number I know is from 2017, when Benesch had over 220 staff and rented four floors (about 120,000 sq. ft.) at 200 Public Square. (See numbered pg. 6 of this appraisal report: https://mayafiles.tase.co.il/rpdf/1086001-1087000/P1086322-01.pdf ) Since then, they've added a decent number of attorneys.

 

Also, as stated above, my information from someone who works at Benesch is that they will be requiring everyone to come in two days a week, and it will be the same two days for everyone. In other words, their long-term space needs should be the same even if they are utilizing work from home, because they (for understandable reasons) want at least a couple days where everybody is in the office.

 

Frankly, if Benesch wants 200,000 sq. ft. (which they had indicated in the past they do), I'm not sure there's ANYWHERE they can get class A office space to fill that need.

 

And I've heard Benesch wants all of the amenities of a trophy-class space (it's the top office class, above Class A) along with naming rights. They seem to be vain and want their building to be called the Benesch Building with their name all in big letters and lights.

13 minutes ago, 3231 said:

My initial thought was that this is a strategy by Stark to try make their TMUD application appear more urgent in order to improve its chances. Anyone else think that?  

This would mean that Benesch would have to participating in this "plot" to a great extent (as well as Ken's sources).  Given they are a law firm that would be interesting to say the least.

5 minutes ago, dski44 said:

I cant understand why this development wouldn't contain any residential component. Considering what MLB wants to see developed around Progressive Field and the existing 4th street environment, there will be high demand in this area for residential options. An office building in the middle of these two districts, that will only be occupied during business hours, doesn't make sense. 

Don't forget that Stark never publicly released details on the smallest version of NuCLEus (the version with no residential component). I always suspected that the one-tower version was created as a backup plan, probably to placate Benesch, where Stark could say "look, if all else fails, we still have the capital and commitments in hand to start building this ASAP."

@3231 I did think that, but wasn’t sure how to articulate it.  You did a great job. I do think that angle has some potential. 

19 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

Don't forget that Stark never publicly released details on the smallest version of NuCLEus (the version with no residential component). I always suspected that the one-tower version was created as a backup plan, probably to placate Benesch, where Stark could say "look, if all else fails, we still have the capital and commitments in hand to start building this ASAP."

That still does not explain Ken's sources which he has stated are very strong.

Edited September 23, 20213 yr by Htsguy

43 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

And I've heard Benesch wants all of the amenities of a trophy-class space (it's the top office class, above Class A) along with naming rights. They seem to be vain and want their building to be called the Benesch Building with their name all in big letters and lights.

Could Benesch be an anchor tenant for the Magellan project?

4 minutes ago, Chazz Michael Michaels said:

Could Benesch be an anchor tenant for the Magellan project?

 

Possibly, but I've not heard that.

1 hour ago, 3231 said:

My initial thought was that this is a strategy by Stark to try make their TMUD application appear more urgent in order to improve its chances. Anyone else think that?  

 

It could be that, and a legit ultimatum to Stark.  The two aren't incompatible.

2 hours ago, KJP said:

I'll be honest, there's still some journalistic/technical things I don't like about this story. I wrote the story because the sources were strong and the non-denial by Benesch was compelling. But Benesch's recent, apparent space needs and Key's space availability don't align. I also would have liked a clearer response by Millennia. I wasn't expecting a response by Stark -- although Bob Stark finally acknowledged receiving my inquiry e-mail this morning but otherwise didn't respond to it.

 

EDIT: Stark's law firm is Thompson Hine LLP.

When did Stark change law firms?  Benesch was their law firm back in 2014 when the nuCLEus project was first announced. 

 

And it's hard to imagine Stark dropping his main tenant for nuCLEus before it's built!

11 minutes ago, Larry1962 said:

When did Stark change law firms?  Benesch was their law firm back in 2014 when the nuCLEus project was first announced. 

 

And it's hard to imagine Stark dropping his main tenant for nuCLEus before it's built!

It’s normal to use multiple firms for different things. They may use both.

My non-expert gut feeling to the story is Benesch purposely fed out wrong information to see who is leaking where.

Is the reason for Stark’s silence on what they’re planning to do because of a perceived need for secrecy in the TMUD application process?  Or because Nucleus doesn’t have adequate financing in place, even with all its downsizing without TMUD?
- or both?  
 

Stark was out promoting the original Nucleus to anyone that would listen in 2014 - now, it’s as top secret as SW was. 

32 minutes ago, scg80 said:

My non-expert gut feeling to the story is Benesch purposely fed out wrong information to see who is leaking where.

 

Have they had an ongoing problem with leaks?

On 8/25/2021 at 10:52 PM, gottaplan said:

I say it every 6 months or so and I'll say it again, this deal isn't happening.  They keep shuffling the deck on makeup of office/retail/apartments, etc....  scrambling for more incentives, trying to get new legislation passed....  they don't have it.  Time is not on their side.  Construction isn't getting cheaper the longer they wait.  The added incentives are barely going to offset increased material costs.  The new SW tower is going to be the new big draw and the other existing "Class A" towers will get down & dirty to win or keep Benesch.  It's already happening.

Although I don't quite share your overall view of DT elsewhere in the thread. I can't help but agree with this. If anything its getting worse as the main tenant now appears to be looking for the exit. 

 

Be as well building a gas station on that land at this rate tbh.

 

 

When do TMUD applications become public record?

It is kind of a shame that all these potential developments are in a holding pattern while they wait to know if they will receive a TMUD.

1 hour ago, scb0525 said:

When do TMUD applications become public record?

 

Unknown. But the ODOD will be under some pressure to release the list after the application deadline. The Ohio Housing Finance Agency releases its list of applicants for housing tax credits very soon after the application deadline.

 

1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said:

It is kind of a shame that all these potential developments are in a holding pattern while they wait to know if they will receive a TMUD.

 

Why? Few if of these projects can move forward in their proposed forms without the TMUD. Some of these projects were proposed or expanded because of the TMUD. So did the projects encourage creation of the TMUD program or did the TMUD program encourage creation of the projects? 

32 minutes ago, KJP said:

Why? Few if of these projects can move forward in their proposed forms without the TMUD. Some of these projects were proposed or expanded because of the TMUD. So did the projects encourage creation of the TMUD program or did the TMUD program encourage creation of the projects? 

Well, I was hopeful that some of the projects would still move forward without the TMUD.  

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

Unknown. But the ODOD will be under some pressure to release the list after the application deadline. The Ohio Housing Finance Agency releases its list of applicants for housing tax credits very soon after the application deadline.

 

 

Why? Few if of these projects can move forward in their proposed forms without the TMUD. Some of these projects were proposed or expanded because of the TMUD. So did the projects encourage creation of the TMUD program or did the TMUD program encourage creation of the projects? 

Well if that is the case - that only a few can move forward without the TMUD then we here at UO will be very disappointed. As you know the TMUD is a state wide program that covers all of the larger cities in Ohio. If they divie up the credits amongst all of the city applicants then we might receive 2-3 larger awards in the 4 year program. And if the remaining applicants can not move forward then we here in Cleveland will truly be disappointed as usual. 

22 minutes ago, simplythis said:

Well if that is the case - that only a few can move forward without the TMUD then we here at UO will be very disappointed. As you know the TMUD is a state wide program that covers all of the larger cities in Ohio. If they divie up the credits amongst all of the city applicants then we might receive 2-3 larger awards in the 4 year program. And if the remaining applicants can not move forward then we here in Cleveland will truly be disappointed as usual. 

 

You will be disappointed as usual.

18 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

You will be disappointed as usual.

Oh no - I won't be dissappointed. I want ALL of these projects to go forward. But the Reality is that I have been following development in downtown Cleveland for 35-40 years and trust me there have been more downs than ups.

1 hour ago, simplythis said:

Oh no - I won't be dissappointed. I want ALL of these projects to go forward. But the Reality is that I have been following development in downtown Cleveland for 35-40 years and trust me there have been more downs than ups.

 

I've been following development in downtown Cleveland for longer. Whether you're let down or lifted up is a personal choice. The reality of real estate development everywhere is that most projects that get conceptualized don't get built. 

2 hours ago, KJP said:

 

I've been following development in downtown Cleveland for longer. Whether you're let down or lifted up is a personal choice. The reality of real estate development everywhere is that most projects that get conceptualized don't get built. 

But it seems like a lot more are getting built now. If people are dissapointed now, they should have been around in the 1970's.

Sources aren't expecting Stark to even submit nuCLEus for a TMUD, unless they can reconstitute this project quickly...

 

 

11 hours ago, KJP said:

 

I've been following development in downtown Cleveland for longer. Whether you're let down or lifted up is a personal choice. The reality of real estate development everywhere is that most projects that get conceptualized don't get built. 

Nobody wants to see the empty parking lots remain but I'd honestly be happy seeing some of these existing office buildings get some real, dynamic updates... program some events, rethink the common spaces, inject some energy...  

8 minutes ago, gottaplan said:

Nobody wants to see the empty parking lots remain but I'd honestly be happy seeing some of these existing office buildings get some real, dynamic updates... program some events, rethink the common spaces, inject some energy...  

I agree. The day I really start to worry about new buildings is when we run out of old vacant ones downtown.  

10 hours ago, B767PILOT said:

But it seems like a lot more are getting built now. If people are dissapointed now, they should have been around in the 1970's.

Actually a lot was built in the 70s and early 80s.  Central National Bank, National City Bank, Bond Court, Bond Court Hotel, One Cleveland Center, Eaton Center, Diamond Shamrock, Park Center Apartments, State Office Tower, Justice Center just to name a few (note using old names)

Well it should be interesting to see what Nucleus turns into in the future if anything.  Stark spent a hell of a lot for that land.  Just as disappointing is that those buildings on the west side of E. 4th will continue to be even more of an after thought and will fall into further disrepair.  

 

If this Benesch development is true (which it appears it is), I would love to be a fly on the wall at Stark Enterprises.  My experience with Bob Stark (former clients who contracted with him) is that he is very vocal expressing displeasure when things go wrong.

Edited September 24, 20213 yr by Htsguy

Well hopefully, we will see something on the site in the not too distant future.  To be honest, I was not very fond of any of the nuCLEus proposals.   Something that blends in with the older buildings in that area would be fine with me.

29 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Well it should be interesting to see what Nucleus turns into in the future if anything.  Stark spent a hell of a lot for that land.  Just as disappointing is that those buildings on the west side of E. 4th will continue to be even more of an after thought and will fall into further disrepair.  

 

If this Benesch development is true (which it appears it is), I would love to be a fly on the wall at Stark Enterprises.  My experience with Bob Stark (former clients who contracted with him) is that he is very vocal expressing displeasure when things go wrong.

 

Yes, he's a pretty emotional man. And BTW, I've updated the article from three days ago about Benesch "expanding" to Key rather than "moving" to Key. Wouldn't be the first big law firm to occupy two buildings downtown. Baker Hostetler is in Key Tower and One Cleveland Center.

20 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Yes, he's a pretty emotional man. And BTW, I've updated the article from three days ago about Benesch "expanding" to Key rather than "moving" to Key. Wouldn't be the first big law firm to occupy two buildings downtown. Baker Hostetler is in Key Tower and One Cleveland Center.

I find that very interesting.  Didn't know that about Baker either.  I am always surprised that certain law firms do not have small seccond offices in University Circle to more easily service clients and estate planning clients in the Heights and farther east.  The proposed Circle Square office building would be a great option for Class A space on the Circle.

I’m sure I speak for many of us... every time there’s a new post on this thread and I see the original, hyper-excited “AAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!” header, I die a little bit inside.
 

But as the eternal optimist, I imagine  Stark might be more determined than ever to get something built there after this latest, very public setback. Whatever your opinion, folks like him don’t mind adversity, and indeed often thrive on it. If that’s the case for Stark, he’s got plenty of fuel. Onward!

This needs thrown in the trash now and something fresh looked at. Time to cut ones losses. Its the hope that kills you as they say. 

It would still be good to see the Herold Building just to the west modernized and enlarged as proposed.  I wonder if that part of the plan might survive independently.  Probably not ...

3 hours ago, Dougal said:

It would still be good to see the Herold Building just to the west modernized and enlarged as proposed.  I wonder if that part of the plan might survive independently.  Probably not ...

I would like to see it modernized, but not enlarged. 

21 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

I would like to see it modernized, but not enlarged. 

 

It would cost too much to simply modernize it. It would need to be bigger in order to generate the kind of revenues to afford the repairs and modernization. The most appropriate public subsidies available for a project of this small scale are historic tax credits which do not allow you to modernize a building architecturally. Perhaps Low Income Housing Tax Credits could be used to renovate the Herold Building and its neighbors with affordable housing. But the buildings are in an historic district so it would require Landmarks Commission approval for any renovations and/or changes.

On 9/25/2021 at 7:08 AM, snakebite said:

This needs thrown in the trash now and something fresh looked at. Time to cut ones losses. Its the hope that kills you as they say. 

LOL!

 

In all honesty, the failure of this project really makes me wonder WHAT sort of project would actually work here?  Office?  Residential?  Hotel/Retail?   Combination of all?  It's just so odd to see dumpy parking lots right next to an NBA/MLB arena..  what other city does that exist?  what does Cleveland need to do in terms of incentives, to get some of this done?  Which project offers maximum spinoff in terms of creating other revenue...

Edited October 4, 20213 yr by gottaplan

14 minutes ago, gottaplan said:

  It's just so odd to see dumpy parking lots right next to an NBA/MLB arena..  what other city does that exist?  what does Cleveland need to do in terms of incentives, to get some of this done?  Which project offers maximum spinoff in terms of creating other revenue...

I get your point, but basically every single arena that’s not in DC or NY is surrounded by parking. 

20 minutes ago, gottaplan said:

LOL!

 

In all honesty, the failure of this project really makes me wonder WHAT sort of project would actually work here?  Office?  Residential?  Hotel/Retail?   Combination of all?  It's just so odd to see dumpy parking lots right next to an NBA/MLB arena..  what other city does that exist?  what does Cleveland need to do in terms of incentives, to get some of this done?  Which project offers maximum spinoff in terms of creating other revenue...

 

The parking lots right there are not a good look, but what other city?  There's plenty to choose from.  Look at Philadelphia's MLB stadium:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9051534,-75.1720825,3a,75y,35.05h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB7ovTXHa6lTi7Fvjy-omqA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

 

^That is literally a half block from a station on the Broad Street subway line.

 

What about Detroit:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3386312,-83.0503395,3a,75y,239.63h,94.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szVeBFi5podCGcJ66bRnFIw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

The United Center in Chicago is surrounded by parking lots. 

1 minute ago, bjk said:

The United Center in Chicago is surrounded by parking lots. 

I was surprised the first time I was at United Center.  The shear amount of surface parking surrounding the arena.  Especially given it was Chicago.

On 9/25/2021 at 7:08 AM, snakebite said:

This needs thrown in the trash now and something fresh looked at. Time to cut ones losses. Its the hope that kills you as they say. 

 

If hope kills you, you're not doing it right.

On 9/24/2021 at 10:29 AM, Htsguy said:

I find that very interesting.  Didn't know that about Baker either.  I am always surprised that certain law firms do not have small seccond offices in University Circle to more easily service clients and estate planning clients in the Heights and farther east.  The proposed Circle Square office building would be a great option for Class A space on the Circle.

Baker's offices in One Cleveland Center are the firm's finance "back office."   All of Baker's Cleveland lawyers and lawyering-support staff (receptionists, secretaries, paralegals, copy centers) are in Key Tower. 

22 hours ago, MissinOhio said:

 

The parking lots right there are not a good look, but what other city?  There's plenty to choose from.  Look at Philadelphia's MLB stadium:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9051534,-75.1720825,3a,75y,35.05h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sB7ovTXHa6lTi7Fvjy-omqA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

 

^That is literally a half block from a station on the Broad Street subway line.

 

What about Detroit:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3386312,-83.0503395,3a,75y,239.63h,94.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szVeBFi5podCGcJ66bRnFIw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

good points, thanks for the reminder, Cleveland is not alone in this

 

Stark confirms nuCLEus project is ‘on hold’

By Ken Prendergast / October 6, 2021

 

A Stark Enterprises executive has confirmed the firm’s dramatic and ambitious nuCLEus development planned for downtown Cleveland is on hold.

 

The project was originally proposed in 2014 as a multi-structure, 2-million-square-foot, mixed-use development marked by a 54-story tower. Since, nuCLEus was shrunk twice to a single 24-story office tower atop a pedestal of parking and retail as Stark searched for a public subsidy to overcome Cleveland’s high construction costs and low rents.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/10/06/stark-confirms-nucleus-project-is-on-hold/

nuCLEus will never be built.