Another thought......

Could this land be used in connection with creating a "ball-park village" in the immediate vicinity of Progressive Field as MLB wants teams to pursue? Demolishing pat of the Gateway parking deck will not be enough land to create this atmosphere. 

5 minutes ago, dski44 said:

Another thought......

Could this land be used in connection with creating a "ball-park village" in the immediate vicinity of Progressive Field as MLB wants teams to pursue? Demolishing pat of the Gateway parking deck will not be enough land to create this atmosphere. 

I like the way you think!!!!

8 minutes ago, dski44 said:

Another thought......

Could this land be used in connection with creating a "ball-park village" in the immediate vicinity of Progressive Field as MLB wants teams to pursue? Demolishing pat of the Gateway parking deck will not be enough land to create this atmosphere. 

Would the Gateway parking decks support a couple more stories on top for development?    Bars and restaurants can't weigh that much.... 

10 minutes ago, Cleburger said:

Would the Gateway parking decks support a couple more stories on top for development?    Bars and restaurants can't weigh that much.... 

Those would probably be better at ground level.

1 hour ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Those would probably be better at ground level.

Well of course for foot traffic...however I was thinking of the St Louis Ball Park village specifically.   They have an entire complex with rooftop seating and bars (much like Wrigley Rooftops).   

 

https://fox2now.com/news/tickets-set-to-go-on-sale-for-rooftop-seating-at-ballpark-village/ 

 

I don't think tearing down the garages would ever fly (especially since it's a revenue source for the city/county) but if you put an attraction on top, they could co-exist.  

 

Of course, having a team with fans like the Cardinals or Cubs helps.... 

 

 

I'd rather see residences and offices and hotels with lots of ground-level retail than some ballpark village. Use the land vertically--40, 50, 60, 70 story bldgs with all (I won't say any) parking underground.

1 hour ago, Cleburger said:

I don't think tearing down the garages would ever fly (especially since it's a revenue source for the city/county) but if you put an attraction on top, they could co-exist.  

 

Of course, having a team with fans like the Cardinals or Cubs helps.... 

 

 

 

The parking decks have been huge money losers for the city. The parking revenue never came close to covering the cost of servicing the bonds let alone the occasional multi-million-dollar repair job. The city will be happy to sell the Gateway East garage to the Cleveland Guardians.

5 hours ago, dski44 said:

Could this land be used in connection with creating a "ball-park village" in the immediate vicinity of Progressive Field as MLB wants teams to pursue?

 

I would love if this happened. I've been to the one in Atlanta for a game and absolutely loved the atmosphere. Game days would be so fun in Cleveland. 

On 1/2/2022 at 10:23 PM, mrnyc said:

watch with an anchor off his back next stark will take this fire sale property money and get a few partners to develop that prime property car wash he owns on la cienega in los angeles. we’ll be watching. umm, not exactly caring, but will note it. 😂

Stark rescinded his own business license in California last year and so he now has limited options there.  Maybe he plans to sell the property.

 

I give Stark and his company a lot of credit for successfully developing many projects both locally and other states. 

 

BUT I'm concerned and sadden that he couldn't or wouldn't develope several projects over the last five to seven years including NUCLEUS and his Pittsburgh and the LA projects too.  BUT it the same time he spent a total of $ 131,000,000 buying properties in NYC, Pittsburgh, and LA since 2017.

 

Where as when the Wolstein family had a approximately $ 20 - 50 Million gap in funding the first phase of the East Bank project, they filled the gap with their OWN MONEY...

 

That $ 131 Million that Stark spent on other projects could had easily filled the NuCLEus project funding gap.  Of course maybe most of that money was from his investors and partners...

 

 

Edited January 6, 20223 yr by Larry1962
Typos

9 hours ago, Larry1962 said:

BUT I'm concerned and sadden that he couldn't or wouldn't develope several projects over the last five to seven years including NUCLEUS and his Pittsburgh and the LA projects too.  BUT it the same time he spent a total of $ 131,000,000 buying properties in NYC, Pittsburgh, and LA since 2017.

 

Maybe Stark's reluctance to invest is because of unhappiness with results of the Beacon investment. 

10 minutes ago, Dougal said:

 

Maybe Stark's reluctance to invest is because of unhappiness with results of the Beacon investment. 

 

Did Beacon underperform?

2 minutes ago, Pugu said:

 

Did Beacon underperform?

Just did a quick search on Beacon's website and it lists only 3 properties that are available now so that seems like a good result to me.

2 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:

Just did a quick search on Beacon's website and it lists only 3 properties that are available now so that seems like a good result to me.

 

other factors would include, did Stark get the rents he wanted, how long did it take to reach near-full occupancy, frequency of tenant turnover, etc.

39 minutes ago, Dougal said:

 

Maybe Stark's reluctance to invest is because of unhappiness with results of the Beacon investment. 

 

I think Larry nailed it. And Stark is a notorious dealmaker in trying to squeeze every last cent out of it and ends up scaring off potential tenants. The last straw was Benesch walking away. I suspect Stark was happy to sell the nuCLEus site for a good price that they made more valuable because there's now a public financing scheme for megaprojects. It made that site more realistic for a development that justfies Stark's asking price. 

I’m a lot less sympathetic to Stark after becoming aware of the amount of money he invested in other cities in the last few years while being unwilling to do more to close the deal for his legacy project in Cleveland.  
 

It was Stark that rolled out the grandiose Nucleus as a love affair to the city- with big talk and  pomp and circumstance - a building he called a Terminal Tower for the 21st century  - sorry, but he gets the  criticism when it turns out he wasn’t  really “all in”.  
 

I’m happy he crossed the finish line with Beacon, which seems to be doing just great. But now that there’s a new player in control of the site - I’m more optimistic we’ll actually get something built there. And hopefully something very significant. 

9 hours ago, KJP said:

 

I think Larry nailed it. And Stark is a notorious dealmaker in trying to squeeze every last cent out of it and ends up scaring off potential tenants. The last straw was Benesch walking away. I suspect Stark was happy to sell the nuCLEus site for a good price that they made more valuable because there's now a public financing scheme for megaprojects. It made that site more realistic for a development that justfies Stark's asking price. 

I hate where tax breaks end up increasing what someone who owns the property can sell it for.  The tax break does nothing to help spur on development, but rather is pocketed by the person.  It defeats the purpose.  We saw this with Centennial where the owner of the property who got the $25million tax break was just able to sell the building for $40 when they had just recently bought it for $22million.  Wish there was some way to prevent this.

Maybe it is Blitzer. A little over a year ago, his plan for a major new development in Philly, including a new arena for the 76ers got denied in favor of a plan from a competing developer. 

34 minutes ago, marty15 said:

Maybe it is Blitzer. A little over a year ago, his plan for a major new development in Philly, including a new arena for the 76ers got denied in favor of a plan from a competing developer. 

I hadn't really thought of that possibility.  If that’s who it is that would be very exciting.

7 hours ago, cle_guy90 said:

I hate where tax breaks end up increasing what someone who owns the property can sell it for.  The tax break does nothing to help spur on development, but rather is pocketed by the person.  

 

Agreed.  However, with Stark- yes, NuCLEus was a bust and he's going to make a nice profit from the sale of the land.  However, the TMUD definitely increased the value of the property.  Without it, there may be some doubt that anyone would be able to develop it in our low-rent/high construction cost market (which I still don't understand- why Cleveland?  Why this town?  Why is it so expensive to build HERE, of all places?  It's not like we've been a high-growth mecca for the last 50 years; otherwise, we'd be Toronto- but we're not).  The TMUD puts in place something that definitely helps the next owner with building something significant.  Inherently with the stipulations in place with the TMUD, the property is worth more.  Without it, it might stay a parking lot for another 20 years.     

Edited January 7, 20223 yr by Oldmanladyluck

 

2 hours ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

However, the TMUD definitely increased the value of the property.  Without it, there may be some doubt that anyone would be able to develop it in our low-rent/high construction cost market (which I still don't understand- why Cleveland?  Why this town?  Why is it so expensive to build HERE, of all places?  It's not like we've been a high-growth mecca for the last 50 years; otherwise, we'd be Toronto- but we're not).  

And then when a development finally gets underway, there are groups protesting.  😠

3 hours ago, LibertyBlvd said:

 

And then when a development finally gets underway, there are groups protesting.  😠

 

There aren't "groups". It's one organization paying minimum wage to 15 or so people who show up when and where they're told to. Quit acting they're actually influencing anything.

 

The only people who seem to notice, or care about "protestors", are angry old Karen's with nothing better to do than to sift through garbage news and cle.bomb all day.

Edited January 7, 20223 yr by Clefan98

And it has nothing to do with this development.

When a basically "shovel ready" development like Nucleus is sold, is it typical for the plans and entitlements to be transferred along with the land as well?  In other words, would it be more likely that a new developer would pick up where Stark left off, or start from scratch?

Well, there are at least three Nucleus plans to choose from....

3 minutes ago, Dino said:

When a basically "shovel ready" development like Nucleus is sold, is it typical for the plans and entitlements to be transferred along with the land as well?  In other words, would it be more likely that a new developer would pick up where Stark left off, or start from scratch?

Hmmm Interesting question

31 minutes ago, simplythis said:

Hmmm Interesting question

 

I'm learning more about the Gateway development. It extends beyond the ex-nucleus site. Thus the plans most likely were not sold to the new buyer.

8 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

I'm learning more about the Gateway development. It extends beyond the ex-nucleus site. Thus the plans most likely were not sold to the new buyer.

When should we start looking out for another article? 

yeah i would doubt new owner would run with any stark dreams and schemes.

13 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

I'm learning more about the Gateway development. It extends beyond the ex-nucleus site. Thus the plans most likely were not sold to the new buyer.

Perhaps towards the Gateway Parking deck?

46 minutes ago, dski44 said:

Perhaps towards the Gateway Parking deck?

That would be cool.  The vacant lot at Huron and Ontario between the Jack Garage and the RoMoFiHo is owned by the City of Cleveland.  It would be cool if something got developed there too.  Whether as part of this or just separately.  I wonder if there's a reason that parcel has never been in play?

4 minutes ago, Dino said:

That would be cool.  The vacant lot at Huron and Ontario between the Jack Garage and the RoMoFiHo is owned by the City of Cleveland.  It would be cool if something got developed there too.  Whether as part of this or just separately.  I wonder if there's a reason that parcel has never been in play?

Yeah, this is interesting. That empty lot is the only available spot neighboring the Nucleus site. Unless the Church of Christ building owners are selling. 

1 minute ago, marty15 said:

Yeah, this is interesting. That empty lot is the only available spot neighboring the Nucleus site. Unless the Church of Christ building owners are selling. 

Yes, the United Church of Christ is looking to sell their building. They are relocating to East 9th st (AECOMM Building??).

Or maybe it’s Gilbert wanting to build a complex for his new sports gambling facility. We’ll probably lose the Herold Block to an expanded parking facility for it.

I don't know who's planning what, but between publicly owned land and the Nucleus site it sounds like most of Huron Rd. from Ontario to E. 7th could have some serious potential.  It's right in the middle of Gilbert's interests too which is cool because he is someone who could really deliver something on a massive scale if he wanted to.  Can't wait to see what's going on!

1 hour ago, marty15 said:

Or maybe it’s Gilbert wanting to build a complex for his new sports gambling facility. We’ll probably lose the Herold Block to an expanded parking facility for it.

Oh god this sounds way too accurate. Columbia Building part 2

Or maybe....

 

So I updated the Dec. 31 article with a quote from Ezra Stark. He sent me two e-mails which I did not receive (found them today in archive), denying the Gateway properties were being sold and were not actively for sale. When I asked why they were subjects of certificates of disclosure, he said they were merely being done in anticipation of future inquiries. When I asked why I'm hearing from multiple sources now that there's a big development in the works, he said my sources are wrong. Then he asked for details as to what the sources were saying.

 

Reminds me a lot of my phone call with Sherwin-Williams' communications director in which he denied SHW was considering a new HQ a year before SHW finally acknowledged it.

Well Ken here's hoping your 2 sources are correct and Ezra Stark is just trying to deflect. I would rather take my chances with another developer than Stark. Nothing against the firm, l just don't think they are in the position to pull the trigger on anything large enough to do justice to the site/location. Besides, based on info up-topic Stark seems more interested in developing outside Cleveland at this time.

 

So rather than see the site remain a parking lot for another 10 years I'd rather take my chances with a yet to be named developer (real or imagined if you believe Ezra Stark).

It's more than two sources now. I'm just about ready to write the next article. 

I'll bet my bottom dollar Bedrock/Rocket is who bought the land.

Also, if my memory is correct, I don't believe the Herald building was part of the deal. Stark still owns that. 

5 hours ago, enginerd12 said:

I'll bet my bottom dollar Bedrock/Rocket is who bought the land.

Also, if my memory is correct, I don't believe the Herald building was part of the deal. Stark still owns that. 

Stark owning Herald and nothing else there would be very bad news for that building. I’m having trouble figuring out how he’s going to make an acceptable renovation fiscally possible. 

5 hours ago, enginerd12 said:

I'll bet my bottom dollar Bedrock/Rocket is who bought the land.

Also, if my memory is correct, I don't believe the Herald building was part of the deal. Stark still owns that. 

Casino Phase 2?    While I would hate the idea, it would fit the business model of capturing sports fans especially with sports books about to happen.  

gilbert doesn't own the jack anymore, I don't think

9 minutes ago, Whipjacka said:

gilbert doesn't own the jack anymore, I don't think

You are correct.  But--he had lots of history in the casino biz.  So as a developer, it would be a good fit with connections to anchor a mixed-use development.  

3 hours ago, Whipjacka said:

gilbert doesn't own the jack anymore, I don't think

True, but the Cavs are in line to get a sports book license. I can’t see him doing nothing with that. 

I think the Ballpark Village makes alot of sense, especially given the new minority owner of the Guardians who is involved in many real estate ventures.  Very deep pockets and a smart guy who may want to contol the ancilary development in the area where the team plays.  Better him than an unrelated party.

In the morning.......

 

 

There's a good nuCLEar bomb joke in here somewhere ... 🤣

Thanks @Geowizical!

 

 

Gateway megaproject taking shape
By Ken Prendergast / January 11, 2022

 

Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert along with potential Cleveland Guardians’ minority owners, partners David Blitzer and Josh Harris, are reportedly joining forces on a huge, coordinated real estate development that would transform downtown Cleveland between its central business district and the Gateway sports facilities.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/01/11/gateway-megaproject-taking-shape/