1 hour ago, urbanetics_ said:

New renderings for the “The Viaduct” - and I gotta say, I’m really blown away by this latest iteration!!

 

I absolutely love the greenery and trees integrated throughout the tower.

 

 

New website for this development is coming too. The site developer requested reprint permission for one of my articles. Site doesn't appear to be live yet.

 

EDIT: I quoted the post with the latest renders since we've scrolled over to a new page.

Edited July 13, 20204 yr by KJP

Looks great. Bring it on!! The only thing this project lacks is that it doesn’t kill any asphalt!  

? Me gustaa ?

 

Gorgeous. At a high level, it’s a conservative design, but a lot of the details are very unique. It’s a standout in the perfect way. 

27 stories is awesome. It's great that the two towers just built and the new ones planned, with this one, nuCLEus, SW, Nautica, City Club are all 20+ stories...and as @KJP might say, with more to come?

3 hours ago, roman totale XVII said:

Looks great. Bring it on!! The only thing this project lacks is that it doesn’t kill any asphalt!  

Fear not! It actually does, there is a small parking lot in front of the garage on the viaduct that its replacing too. We are close to perfection with this one.

On 7/13/2020 at 3:56 PM, cadmen said:

That design looks exactly like much of the new construction I see in my travels around the US. While some may see the look as derivative I view it as the look of a modern city. Our problem IMO is it probably won't like like that if/when it does get built. The Lumen was a superb design until the review board had to muck it up with those silly stripes. There's a reason why we struggle so much in this town and it starts with leadership on many fronts. 

 

Agreed! Love it. My first impression was that it's very Vancouver, which is a plus in my book.

I am in love with this tower!!! This is like the Lumen (Flats edition)

for a rather standard new apt tower, it is a very nice one.

 

excellent. 

 

i see nothing of the ground level will be saved -- so those two little structures on the site will be demoed.

 

thats an ok tradeoff for this pretty baby.

This viaduct apartment building was on the Planning Commission agenda for schematic approval today but there was no presentation for some reason.  Anybody know why it was dropped or did not go forward?  Did something negative happen at Design Review yesterday?  I did miss the first half hour of the meeting so maybe it jumped the agenda for some reason.

^It was tabled yesterday at Design Review. Still sounds positive though and that after some more communications and assurance, they’ll be ready to get going on this.

 

“Committee members delayed a vote on the Viaduct until their next meeting, scheduled for Aug. 6, and asked developer Wayne Jatsek and his partners to meet with the owners of two small, historic buildings that flank the 0.3-acre site on the north side of the Superior Viaduct.

 

Representatives for those buildings spoke up during Thursday's meeting, expressing concerns about blocked sightlines and possible damage from excavation and construction.”

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/developers-forge-ahead-apartment-plans-clevelands-near-west-side

Edited July 17, 20204 yr by urbanetics_

27 minutes ago, urbanetics_ said:

^It was tabled yesterday at Design Review. Still sounds positive though and that after some more communications and assurance, they’ll be ready to get going on this.

 

“Committee members delayed a vote on the Viaduct until their next meeting, scheduled for Aug. 6, and asked developer Wayne Jatsek and his partners to meet with the owners of two small, historic buildings that flank the 0.3-acre site on the north side of the Superior Viaduct.

 

Representatives for those buildings spoke up during Thursday's meeting, expressing concerns about blocked sightlines and possible damage from excavation and construction.”

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/developers-forge-ahead-apartment-plans-clevelands-near-west-side

thanks

This was a nice quote to read: "Jatsek, a local developer with a construction background, said he's not ready to talk about project costs. He and his partners have a contract to buy the property, at 2208-2210 Superior Viaduct, for an undisclosed price. They're on the verge of picking a construction team and hope to start site work by mid-2021. The pandemic isn't altering that timeline, Jatsek said during a phone interview Friday. "It's not derailing us at all," he said.""

I agree, this is a very nicely designed tower.

 

I don't like the concerns about "blocked sight lines"...that argument could kill all kinds of projects if it were valid.  In urban development, something bigger and taller could always pop up next door.

I love it. Please tell me its condos (where owners may rent their units if they want) instead of being apartments. There are THOUSANDS of people who would love to live in such a place (myself included), but aren't going to throw $25k-$50k/year in the toilet in rent.  And those that do want to rent would be able to do so from owners that rent out their units.

Edited July 18, 20204 yr by Pugu

Wouldn’t it be something if just one time we could experience a sort of Frank Capra moment (“It’s A Wonderful Life” director, kids) when everybody agreed and embraced something that’s great for the city  - even though they might lose their personal view or have to endure construction activity.  Maybe if they thought about how a state of the art residential tower could actually enhance and even transform their neighborhood Into something greater.  I know it’s wishful thinking - but damn,  that would be sweet.  Anyway, props to Jatsek and his team for their commitment. 

Edited July 18, 20204 yr by CleveFan

On 7/17/2020 at 7:31 PM, cfdwarrior said:

I don't like the concerns about "blocked sight lines"...that argument could kill all kinds of projects if it were valid.  In urban development, something bigger and taller could always pop up next door.

I think there was some context left out of Michelle's article, one of the neighbor's "blocked sight lines" complaints was in regards to bedroom windows being blocked in by this proposed building, not about losing views

2 hours ago, andrew0816 said:

I think there was some context left out of Michelle's article, one of the neighbor's "blocked sight lines" complaints was in regards to bedroom windows being blocked in by this proposed building, not about losing views

 

Interesting. I didn't realize there were windows overlooking the short building in the middle. Checking on Streetview, appears there are a bunch of windows on the sides. Yikes that's an ugly situation.

 

One of the quirks of building on the lot line. If you don't have air rights next door you can't assume your windows won't be blocked at some point, even a hundred years later.

Yeah unless they got an easement and have a legally binding document that says they could retain those windows indefinitely, that's still not this developer's problem.

 

Don't build windows on a lot line and more importantly, don't buy windows on a lot line if you don't want the risk of those having to be closed up in the future. I have zero sympathy for that argument. Do your homework before you buy a place.

Edited July 21, 20204 yr by jmicha

View of both sides from Bing Aerial View

 

2 hours ago, jmicha said:

Yeah unless they got an easement and have a legally binding document that says they could retain those windows indefinitely, that's still not this developer's problem.

 

Don't build on a lot line and more importantly, don't buy on a lot line if you don't want the risk of those having to be closed up in the future. I have zero sympathy for that argument. Do your homework before you buy a place.

 

In all fairness, in an urban neighborhood we do want people to build up to the lot lines.  We just don't want them to put windows there and expect that the next person won't build up to their lot line!

At least one of the bedrooms in the new tower will also not have a view because of the neighboring buildings.

I don't think the new building will have that issue, since those floors will be garage levels. I suppose one possible work around (if the developers were being extra nice) to keep everyone happy, would be to build it with cutouts where the neighboring windows are to create light wells. The new building would probably lose like 20 or so parking spaces that way, which I'm sure would then set the neighborhood off about "not enough parking", but hey its an idea.

14 hours ago, X said:

 

In all fairness, in an urban neighborhood we do want people to build up to the lot lines.  We just don't want them to put windows there and expect that the next person won't build up to their lot line!

Yes, thanks! My wording was poor. Don't buy *windows* on a lot line.

(BOOM)

ANOTHER ONE?!?

I’ll check back in a few hours and see if the boom has dropped. Looking forward to reading. 

Had to run out to the store. Also gives some more time for interested parties I've reached out to, to respond if they want. 

 

Thursday, July 23, 2020

Columbus developer has big plans for Flats West Bank

 

According to three sources who agreed to speak off the record, Flats West Bank property owner Jeff Jacobs has agreed to sell 5.6 acres of prime riverfront land near downtown Cleveland to a Columbus-based real estate developer.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/07/columbus-developer-has-big-plans-for.html?m=1

Edited July 24, 20204 yr by KJP

I like that the best of all the Nautica renderings we've seen in a while!  Looks like they're gonna save the Harbor Inn, and in fact it doesn't look like any of the historic buildings are shown as being demolished.

I believe that rendering is just a suggestion- not necessarily indicative of final plans.  But the fact that Casto is already active here with Dexter Place (a very nicely designed building IMHO) I am a lot more confident in this plan than if it were someone else.  It will be exciting to see what happens!

 

Also... some NICE tidbits at the end regarding MRN and Voss/the Bakersfield/Union Bank lot!!!

43 minutes ago, mrclifton88 said:

I believe that rendering is just a suggestion- not necessarily indicative of final plans.  But the fact that Casto is already active here with Dexter Place (a very nicely designed building IMHO) I am a lot more confident in this plan than if it were someone else.  It will be exciting to see what happens!

 

Also... some NICE tidbits at the end regarding MRN and Voss/the Bakersfield/Union Bank lot!!!

 

Correct.

 

Yep, don't miss the stuff at the end!

That was a pretty good boom!  Thanks for posting.

1 hour ago, X said:

I like that the best of all the Nautica renderings we've seen in a while!  Looks like they're gonna save the Harbor Inn, and in fact it doesn't look like any of the historic buildings are shown as being demolished.

That "pretty picture" has been floating around for awhile.  Like others said, not a real thing.

5 hours ago, mrclifton88 said:

Also... some NICE tidbits at the end regarding MRN and Voss/the Bakersfield/Union Bank lot!!!

That would be a short walk to Bakersfield ?.. Consider me interested

Glad to hear it's Casto. Even with Dexter Place only partially complete, I'm very impressed with them. Along with that, their focus in other urban areas shows they have the type of experience to pull off a larger urban infill project like Nautica. I'm quite optimistic about this.

Between this parking lot and the other one on Public Square that's going to S-W, it appears that the Jacobs family is "done" with Cleveland real estate.  (As KJP's article indicates, Jeff Jacobs is concentrating on gaming interests in Colorado these days).  I hate to say it, but...good riddance?  For the last 40 years, "hometown" real estate entities like Jacobs and Forest City have shown remarkably little interest in developing anything in their backyard.  Somehow they missed out on the downtown residential boom of the 2010's and the neighborhood renaissances in Ohio City, Tremont, and Detroit Shoreway as well.  In their place, we've seen some local companies like Geis and K&D take advantage of these trends.  We've also seen a lot of outside developers putting their money where their mouth is (the Columbus folks here, the Chicago developer at 25th and Lorain).  It's always nice to see money pouring in from outside the region, as that puts Cleveland on the national development map.  Onwards and upwards!

The Jacob group that owned the Public Square lot still owns a bunch of land in Avon and Beachwood area (Chagrin Highlands), so we're not done just yet with the sprawly development. Jeff's ownership of the west bank property was a different entity. He seems uninterested in doing any development here.

2 hours ago, Down_with_Ctown said:

 For the last 40 years, "hometown" real estate entities like Jacobs and Forest City have shown remarkably little interest in developing anything in their backyard.  

Richard Jacobs was bullish on Cleveland.  Jeff not so much.

Whatever happened with the re-cladding of the Stonebridge condo building?  It was part of a settlement of a law suit brought by the HOA.

1 hour ago, sooner said:

Whatever happened with the re-cladding of the Stonebridge condo building?  It was part of a settlement of a law suit brought by the HOA.

 

Still coming. It was discussed at the Waterfront Block Club meeting in June when the club endorsed The Viaduct high-rise. Unfortunately I wasn't paying attention to the discussion about the recladding schedule. ?

I guess since all other Viaduct-related development posts seem to end up here, I’ll add this one:

 

I see the Viaduct Apartment Building is back on tomorrows  Planning Commissions meeting for schematic approval.

4 hours ago, Htsguy said:

I see the Viaduct Apartment Building is back on tomorrows  Planning Commissions meeting for schematic approval.

 

They just picked Geis as their general contractor. It will be Geis' first new-build skyscraper project. Geis rebuilt the old Ameritrust tower and did a great job. But it wasn't new construction. They've never had to put in a foundation for a high-rise, construct the skeleton, etc etc. It's going to be interesting.

^ So Geis will get moving on this before their own tower on E9th & Bolivar..?

2 minutes ago, roman totale XVII said:

^ So Geis will get moving on this before their own tower on E9th & Bolivar..?

Experience is everything.  One way to get experience building a tower is to actively engage in building one with a partner.

16 minutes ago, roman totale XVII said:

^ So Geis will get moving on this before their own tower on E9th & Bolivar..?

 

Yes

 

10 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

Experience is everything.  One way to get experience building a tower is to actively engage in building one with a partner.

 

Especially for building in New York City, which is something Geis is trying to do more of.

The street frontage views on Superior Viaduct and Washington are new...

 

 

The frontage along the viaduct looks fantastic.