Seems unlikely. If they want to build a new downtown tower, why not go to nuCLEus, or the Weston warehouse district parking lots, or one of the other prime surface parking lots (like the E. 9th lot next to Progressive Field).  Why knock down buildings?  Why forgo the opportunity to be on a corner?

 

Better yet, why forego the opportunity for one of Cleveland's largest and oldest corporate citizens to tower over Public Square on the Jacobs lot? I'm sure Jacobs would be happy to construct for it a stunning architectural statement about S-W's next 150 years and assume the debt from this venture.

Seems unlikely. If they want to build a new downtown tower, why not go to nuCLEus, or the Weston warehouse district parking lots, or one of the other prime surface parking lots (like the E. 9th lot next to Progressive Field).  Why knock down buildings?  Why forgo the opportunity to be on a corner?

 

Better yet, why forego the opportunity for one of Cleveland's largest and oldest corporate citizens to tower over Public Square on the Jacobs lot? I'm sure Jacobs would be happy to construct for it a stunning architectural statement about S-W's next 150 years and assume the debt from this venture.

 

That certainly seems to be the most logical spot, no argument from me there.

 

Additionally, if SW continues to grow, the will likely need rental space in a new, different building. As a consequence of their own success, I think SW will be forced to confront this relocation by 2020 at the latest.

 

Just a random, quasi-irrelevant thought, does anyone know if the office footprint of these buildings is greater than the Rose Building --- ala MedMu

Seems unlikely. If they want to build a new downtown tower, why not go to nuCLEus, or the Weston warehouse district parking lots, or one of the other prime surface parking lots (like the E. 9th lot next to Progressive Field).  Why knock down buildings?  Why forgo the opportunity to be on a corner?

 

And even if you are OK knocking down buildings (which really isn't all that hard or expensive), why build a tower that would face 20 stories of mostly blank wall on two sides? I agree this is a very unlikely site for a new office tower.

Just a random, quasi-irrelevant thought, does anyone know if the office footprint of these buildings is greater than the Rose Building --- ala MedMu

 

I responded at the Cleveland office development thread:

https://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4266.msg845709.html#msg845709

CLEVELAND, Ohio - The troubled John Hartness Brown complex in downtown Cleveland could change hands in late April, thanks to an appeals court decision issued last week.

 

On Thursday, the Eighth District Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's 2016 decision to green-light the sale of the empty Euclid Avenue buildings, which were earmarked years ago as the potential site of a Le Meridien hotel. The buyer, Alto Partners, has offered $9.1 million for the property, which is in foreclosure and controlled by a court-appointed receiver.

 

More at:

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/04/court_ruling_paves_way_for_sal.html

This is exciting! Happy the litigation seems to be reaching a logical end.

Anyone know if the JHB litigation is wrapped up?

I thought it was close to an end in April.

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/08/john_hartness_brown_complex_in.html#incart_river_home

I'm very curious about how these buildings will turn out. Alto is based in Istanbul and they some rather interesting designs from their projects in Kazakhstan. Preserving these buildings is definitely something new for this company. Hopefully they treat this with care.

Good news. Alto has a track record of developing in difficult markets, including in Iraq of all places. Alto was the developer who said it wants to develop a million square feet of offices in Cleveland, presumably for back-office functions relocating from expensive coastal markets.

Have to disagree with mjarboe[/member]. The purchase was more Ottoman than Byzantine.

Channel 5 Story. http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/oh-cuyahoga/long-vacant-downtown-cleveland-buildings-will-get-new-life

I'm very curious about how these buildings will turn out.

 

Me, too. In the rendering (not to be trusted, I realize) a lot of period detail seems to be left out.

I'll be blunt. The rendering is atrocious. But beggars can't be choosers at this point lol.

 

I'm usually in the camp of preserving historical buildings... but I wouldn't hate a complete tear-down.

I'd be surprised if the project is viable without the credits, so can't say I'm all that worried about the renderings.

Have to disagree with mjarboe[/member]. The purchase was more Ottoman than Byzantine.

 

I chuckled appreciatively

Nice article about the progress being made on the CAC Building:

 

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/CleAthleticClub120717.aspx

 

Really shows what kind of shape the building was in and why it has taken so long to get to where were at today.  This is going to fill in a very significant patch of Euclid.  Now just waiting on JHB Building and 925 and we've got a complete street!

 

I honestly think we say JHB demolished in the next 2-3 years.

 

For what? Or because of neglect?

Well my how things have changed.....

 

John Hartness Brown makeover in downtown Cleveland will be housing, not a hotel (photos)

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - What's old is new again at the long-suffering John Hartness Brown complex in downtown Cleveland, where the property's new owner has returned to the original vision for redevelopment: Housing, not a hotel.

 

Alto Partners no longer plans to include a 140-room, limited-service hotel in a revival of the buildings, a series of empty facades at 1001-1101 Euclid Ave. That blighted expanse of real estate now is earmarked for 228 apartments, with 20,000 square feet of retail along the street and 230 parking spaces tucked inside. Alto recently amended its plans in a filing with the state.

 

In an email, Alto executive Michael Sabracos confirmed the change in scope. Lenders, he wrote, weren't nearly as enthusiastic about a hotel as they were about apartments.

 

"Given the history of this project, we wanted to take a path that provided us with the upmost success," wrote Sabracos, chief executive officer for Alto's U.S. operations. "Since our decision, we have secured the financing to move forward with the project ... and look forward to bringing the building back to life."

 

 

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/12/john_hartness_brown_makeover_i.html#incart_river_home

 

 

^ for Mr. Sabracos: http://grammarist.com/usage/upmost-utmost/

Well my how things have changed.....

 

John Hartness Brown makeover in downtown Cleveland will be housing, not a hotel (photos)

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - What's old is new again at the long-suffering John Hartness Brown complex in downtown Cleveland, where the property's new owner has returned to the original vision for redevelopment: Housing, not a hotel.

 

Alto Partners no longer plans to include a 140-room, limited-service hotel in a revival of the buildings, a series of empty facades at 1001-1101 Euclid Ave. That blighted expanse of real estate now is earmarked for 228 apartments, with 20,000 square feet of retail along the street and 230 parking spaces tucked inside. Alto recently amended its plans in a filing with the state.

 

In an email, Alto executive Michael Sabracos confirmed the change in scope. Lenders, he wrote, weren't nearly as enthusiastic about a hotel as they were about apartments.

 

"Given the history of this project, we wanted to take a path that provided us with the upmost success," wrote Sabracos, chief executive officer for Alto's U.S. operations. "Since our decision, we have secured the financing to move forward with the project ... and look forward to bringing the building back to life."

 

 

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/12/john_hartness_brown_makeover_i.html#incart_river_home

 

 

 

MAKE IT CONDOS FOR THE LOVE  OF GOD

As much as I wish it weren't the case, Banks are extremely apprehensive about financing condos anywhere outside of tier 1 markets.

I like the latest rendering. It preserves the distinctiveness of the five facades better than the previous effort.

As much as I wish it weren't the case, Banks are extremely apprehensive about financing condos anywhere outside of tier 1 markets.

 

And condos cannot be constructed using historic tax credits, which is a major source of funding in this project.

^I believe after a certain amount of time they can be converted, after 5 or so years if memory serves.

^Usually condos are built a little better than rental units--condos have better sound proofing, thicker walls, etc.  So I hope the developer builds with this vision in mind---condos after 5 years.....

Regardless if its condos or not, THIS IS GREAT NEWS!

 

Always good to rebuild our population base!

I like the latest rendering. It preserves the distinctiveness of the five facades better than the previous effort.

Agreed.  There is so much new construction where they try to mimic having different facades, so its nice when you have the real thing to work with

^The irony! You'll recall that the "historic" facades being restored were themselves installed post-construction to make a single building look like multiple buildings.

If you are saying these five buildings were originally all one, I don’t think that’s the case at all..

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/815

 

I'm not sure how many different buildings are a part of John Hartness Brown, but it's neither 1 nor 5.  In fact, this "complex" has a really interesting history.  Even at it's inception it was mired in financial difficulties and sat half completed as an eyesore while the neighborhood around it developed.  So it has come full circle, at least.

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/815

 

I'm not sure how many different buildings are a part of John Hartness Brown, but it's neither 1 nor 5.  In fact, this "complex" has a really interesting history.  Even at it's inception it was mired in financial difficulties and sat half completed as an eyesore while the neighborhood around it developed.  So it has come full circle, at least.

 

Right, sorry, my comment applies only to the westernmost three or four facades, which were tacked onto the original John Hartness Brown Building as part of the work-out/alterations to make it look like multiple smaller buildings. That's what made punch[/member]'s post ironic. The exterior of the original building appears to have been completed, so if it became an eyesore, it was probably due to lack of maintenance as it languished unoccupied.

 

The original JHB building was a modern, glassy art-nouveau-ish masterpiece, far cooler, IMHO, than the pretty generic neoclassical stuff being restored now.  Eric Johannesen's terrific Cleveland architecture history book has a great description, IIRC. The current project is obviously a huge upgrade from the fugly post war modernization, so definitely not complaining. It's funny how many of the "historic" facades being restored downtown were themselves second generation facades, added to suit evolving tastes the same way the post war modernizations were.

 

By the way, the Rice murder mentioned in that Clevelandhistorical link in which JHB was implicated is itself pretty fascinating: http://strangeco.blogspot.com/2017/11/murder-in-euclid-heights.html

 

EDIT: from the Clevelandhistorical link X provides, this pic is particularly interesting: https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/815#&gid=1&pid=8  Looks like it was more than just facade reconstruction; much of the underlying building was expanded and rebuilt.

 

 

Euclid has changed so much since my time in Cleveland in 2010.  With the CAC underway across the street, this is really the last piece to tying everything together.

Euclid has changed so much since my time in Cleveland in 2010.  With the CAC underway across the street, this is really the last piece to tying everything together.

 

 

The former Huntington Building (925 Euclid Ave) is still empty, and I don't think that construction has started on it yet.  But other than that I'm pretty sure this is the last empty building between E.9th and Playhouse Square.

Euclid has changed so much since my time in Cleveland in 2010.  With the CAC underway across the street, this is really the last piece to tying everything together.

 

The former Huntington Building (925 Euclid Ave) is still empty, and I don't think that construction has started on it yet.  But other than that I'm pretty sure this is the last empty building between E.9th and Playhouse Square.

 

That's still substantial and shouldn't be disregarded, IMO. By square footage, 925 is one of the largest downtown.

 

 

 

Double post

That's still substantial and shouldn't be disregarded, IMO. By square footage, 925 is one of the largest downtown.

 

 

I totally agree.  It is a bit surprising how large 925 actually is.

 

That intersection went from almost totally empty a few years ago, to 75% full.  When the 925 redevelopment is finished it's gonna be nice to drive down Euclid from TC to PHS!!!

That's still substantial and shouldn't be disregarded, IMO. By square footage, 925 is one of the largest downtown.

 

 

I totally agree.  It is a bit surprising how large 925 actually is.

 

That intersection went from almost totally empty a few years ago, to 75% full.  When the 925 redevelopment is finished it's gonna be nice to drive down Euclid from TC to PHS!!!

 

By square footage only Key Tower is larger than 925.

Federal Building may be the largest SF

A few weeks ago, I met with Michael Sabracos at Alto Partners, and discussed this project in detail.  And to be honest, even though I think he is a decent fellow, I really think he is biting off more than he can chew.

 

First of all, by quickly perusing their flashy website, one would assume Alto Partners is a major developer of luxury malls and energy infrastructure in Eurasia.  But actually, beyond the website, which hasn't been updated since 2014, Alto Partners seems to be more of a fiction than a reality.  Mr. Sabracos is a Baltimore-based investor hired by Alto about a year ago, and has no office or personnel here in Cleveland.  The original founder of Alto, Yusuf Sarimsakci, has no personal involvement or investment in the JHB complex or Alto's newest investment in Erieview.  So, Mr. Sarimsakci, who stylizes himself as the Turkish Donald Trump, won't be seen dining at Lola any time soon.  Because Mr. Sarimsakci got into some legal trouble for not paying real estate commissions and contractors for a project in Dallas...that may be for the best.

 

As noted already, the backbone of the JHB project is not its after rehab appraisal or its cashflow, but it's the historical tax credits, which according to Mr. Sabracos, are quite favorable in Ohio.  Since all of Euclid Avenue has been listed to the National Register of Historic Places, including the JHB, he sees this project as quite attractive.  I am no expert in the historic registry process, but I cannot fathom that a half-mile stretch of Euclid Avenue, old buildings and new, would be listed to the Register as a whole.  But that's neither here nor there.

 

So, I also asked Mr. Sabracos what returns he was expecting for his investors, who hail from Kazakhstan and Russia, and he told me he is looking at upwards of thirty percent.  I was taken aback by that, as someone who has seen Downtown Cleveland's ups and downs over the decades and is personally accustomed to real estate projects in hot coastal markets returning in the ten to twelve percent range.

 

I am always happy to see folks moving in and investing in Downtown Cleveland.  Always.  But, honestly, the situation here is quite an oddity, a very complex historic property (a) deep in receivership, (b) requiring at least $50 million to rehabilitate, © that no local developer (Stark, Weston, K&D, Millennia, etc...) want to touch, and (d) backed by foreign money with the promise of a thirty percent return.  I didn't ask Mr. Sabracos to see his numbers, but I honestly wish him the best of luck.

 

But you know what they say about things that sound too good to be true...

All of a sudden this reminds me of the out of state ownership that purchased the Huntington 925 Building.

They said they had financing all but wrapped up when the purchased the building and a few years later they receive the 25 million tax credit and work has yet to start. Now they are looking for additional investors.

The former Huntington Building (925 Euclid Ave) is still empty, and I don't think that construction has started on it yet.  But other than that I'm pretty sure this is the last empty building between E.9th and Playhouse Square.

 

First part is true--no construction yet at 925.  As for the second sentence, the buildings next door are empty too (the subject of this thread)?

All of a sudden this reminds me of the out of state ownership that purchased the Huntington 925 Building.

They said they had financing all but wrapped up when the purchased the building and a few years later they receive the 25 million tax credit and work has yet to start. Now they are looking for additional investors.

 

I didn't know that about 925.  Wikipedia says it is owned by Optima.  I don't know Optima very well, but they seem to be in a similar situation as Alto...flush with Eastern European cash and have no idea where or how to spend it.

 

But I don't mind out of state or foreign investors per se.  In fact, it can bring some great exposure to Cleveland.  But if a project's backers know as much about Cleveland as I know about Mars, I cannot imagine any major project, especially one of this complexity being successful.

This is disconcerting to hear. Is there any indication that the owners are at least securing the building from further damage?

This is disconcerting to hear. Is there any indication that the owners are at least securing the building from further damage?

 

Not that I am aware.  They have the plastic sheets, which Mr. Sabracos was a little bit embarrassed about.  I can only assume that the water is shut off, but I didn't ask about the roof.

 

Sorry if it looks like I am just suddenly being active here, I am trying to get myself above "excavation site" status.

At this point I'm going to go with the most recent info from mjarboe[/member] which was just last month and seems a bit more optimistic regarding this project.

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/12/john_hartness_brown_makeover_i.html#incart_river_home

I love preserving historic structures. But the space is going to need to be torn down. Think about the exorbitant rehab cost. If someone has the cash to come in there and do everything the right way, with the right tenants, don't you think they will want to start from scratch?

I love preserving historic structures. But the space is going to need to be torn down. Think about the exorbitant rehab cost. If someone has the cash to come in there and do everything the right way, with the right tenants, don't you think they will want to start from scratch?

 

It's only exorbitant at current Cleveland rents. In a couple of years, I think it will look more do-able. Putting up with the eyesore in the meanwhile will be vexing; but we're used to that.

There is no chance whatsoever that a tear down and rebuild will be cheaper than renovation. Any developer bidding on this building was likely after the massive preservation tax credits, which go up in smoke with demolition. Though I agree this project is hanging on by a thread. If the state claws back the credit, the building is doomed.

There is no chance whatsoever that a tear down and rebuild will be cheaper than renovation. Any developer bidding on this building was likely after the massive preservation tax credits, which go up in smoke with demolition. Though I agree this project is hanging on by a thread. If the state claws back the credit, the building is doomed.

 

My apologies, I did not mean to suggest it would be cheaper.

 

All I am saying is... at a certain point, the renovation cost will hit a threshold where I think it will be necessary to tear down in order to attract tenants.

 

I know this is a pipe dream, but that block would be magnificent for a 35-40 story SW tower. It would directly abut the street, fill in a major gap in the skyline, and make that strip of Euclid vibrant again.

^Not sure that makes sense. The threshold that matters is rent being high enough to finance some kind of project, and that threshold for a heavily subsidized rehab is a lot lower than for a shiny new tower.

 

EDIT: I botched it too. Construction costs do clearly matter as you said.  The real threshold is the projected return, coverage ratio, etc. that make the project feasible, and that's much more likely to happen with heavily subsidized rehab than new construction. As Mendo implied, the viable alternatives right now are rehab or demolition and long term surface parking.