^That was a proposal which would have been built on the lowrise office building on the northeast corner of 9th and Prospect.

 

If you go to slide 6 of 38 on that link, its weird to see the Schofield Tower still covered in its ugly cladding!  And by "weird" I mean even the current state is an improvement over that!

Are the City (lakefront) and the County (admin bldg) in some kind of contest to see which entity can hire more consultants and get more proposals over the years on the same subject?  To date, how much money has the county spent to have these studies done?

 

Renderings are cheaper than actually having to do anything.

^Yeah, cheapness was never really the problem of the old county government, so I don't really get that comment. 

 

Does anyone have any actual complaints about the current space planning process?  We all understand that the three commissioners wasted millions getting fleeced by Staubach and by being incompetent buffoons.  They've been fired, in no small part because of that adventure. I think we need to view that as one big sunk cost and just move on now instead of obliquely impugning current efforts.

Are the City (lakefront) and the County (admin bldg) in some kind of contest to see which entity can hire more consultants and get more proposals over the years on the same subject?  To date, how much money has the county spent to have these studies done?

 

Probably enough to pay for both projects! :P

Does anyone have any actual complaints about the current space planning process?

No complaints yet. Not the biggest fan of how much money they are spending. But it's no surprise with that many properties for sale. It's nice to see the marketing push from CBRE, but realistically the buildings are going to local companies. A for-sale ad in the plain dealer would have been sufficient. :-P

 

The real fun begins in September after the proposal deadline. Then we'll see how transparent the county really is...

Contract about to be awarded for firm to review developer proposals to consolidate County agencies. Was very close between URS and Vocon.

Cuyahoga County real estate deals attract 31 bidders, from well-known developers to churches

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cuyahoga County received 31 bids Friday from companies looking to buy government buildings or offering space for the county's new headquarters offices or storage needs.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/09/cuyahoga_county_real_estate_de.html#incart_river_default

 

Interesting the amount of players that come out of the woodwork when there's something big...I'm not sold on Forest City offering the Halle Building to the County. I'd like to think they have something up their sleeve. But that's more than likely wishful thinking.

That's quite a list. I foresee some major news stories coming out of this in the days and weeks ahead.

^^Keep in mind this the full list of bidders for any part of the transaction; most of these parties are probably only looking to buy a property or two from the county, not participate in the HQ project. I'm actually surprised the list isn't a little bit longer given that there are 13 properties on the block.

^^Keep in mind this the full list of bidders for any part of the transaction; most of these parties are probably only looking to buy a property or two from the county, not participate in the HQ project. I'm actually surprised the list isn't a little bit longer given that there are 13 properties on the block.

 

Yep. So think of all the potential redevelopment projects that are likely to come out of this. That's why I said this is the start of a LOT more news coverage on a multitude of projects.

I think Geis is really positioning themselves to get the county to be the "anchor tenant" on the lakefornt.  They have been very active the past several months downtown.  That said, I don't think they will be successful.

^^Keep in mind this the full list of bidders for any part of the transaction; most of these parties are probably only looking to buy a property or two from the county, not participate in the HQ project. I'm actually surprised the list isn't a little bit longer given that there are 13 properties on the block.

 

Yep. So think of all the potential redevelopment projects that are likely to come out of this. That's why I said this is the start of a LOT more news coverage on a multitude of projects.

 

Oh I know, I was just clarifying after Klingaling's post that a lot of these bidders are probably not in this for "something big."  When we focus on the new HQ project, the current HQ building, and Ameritrust, the number of bidders is probably a lot lower.  I agree it's going to be interesting to see who goes after Superior Auto Title, the County Archives, and old juvie hall. And the Marion building too, which hasn't generated much buzz on UO, but could definitely be an interesting conversion candidate.

According to Cuyahoga County Board Meeting Agendas, there have been many Executive Sessions - but little detail to the taxpayers.

"It's kind of a hallmark of the corruption scandal that things were done in a secretive way, and sunshine is the best disinfectant for it",

FitzGerald March 2011.

I'm waiting for the sunshine.

^and if I was a potential "buyer" of county property I would like to see lots of sunshine too. 

All discussions of negotiations regarding personnel, lawsuits and property transactions are routinely conducted in executive sessions at all levels of government. This can be abused of course, as the prior county government did. But considering how many property transactions are ocurring right now, having many executive sessions isn't a bad thing. In fact I am encouraged to see they're having so many as it suggests there's a lot of interest in cuyahoga County's properties -- as long as its not being abused.

What's interesting to me is that these two uses may well end up being in two separate buildings or even two separate cities......

 

Consolidated Headquarters Requirement: Cuyahoga County will be consolidating its administrative operations into a modern office environment consisting of approximately 225,000 SF of office space in the Central Business District in Cleveland, Ohio.

 

Consolidated Storage Facility Requirement: Cuyahoga County will be consolidating its active and dead storage operations into a single, more easily managed facility consisting of approximately 200,000 SF of space in the Cleveland, Ohio area.

 

If they are in the same building, that's going to have to be a lot of space!

There is going to be one modern office building that is going to have that much square feet available in Fall 2013...  8-)

There is going to be one modern office building that is going to have that much square feet available in Fall 2013...  8-)

 

Yeah, right on Public Square. A 425,000-square-foot building on top of a dozen levels of structured parking on top of a multi-story atrium. That should be a roughly 30-story building.... OK kids. Don't have a heart attack. We're just having fun here.

^I'm assuming LoveCLE is referring to the Flats Tower, although there isn't going to be 425,000 sf available.  E&Y and Tucker Ellis will occupy around half of the total 450,000 sf of space.

^I'm assuming LoveCLE is referring to the Flats Tower, although there isn't going to be 425,000 sf available.  E&Y and Tucker Ellis will occupy around half of the total 450,000 sf of space.

 

It shouldn't be, since the Flats Tower is due to open in the spring. LoveCLE, are you referring to something else? What other modern office building will have that much space available this fall?

^I'm assuming LoveCLE is referring to the Flats Tower, although there isn't going to be 425,000 sf available.  E&Y and Tucker Ellis will occupy around half of the total 450,000 sf of space.

 

It shouldn't be, since the Flats Tower is due to open in the spring. LoveCLE, are you referring to something else? What other modern office building will have that much space available this fall?

 

Ah, I missed that.  Everything else sounded like the Flats Tower to me.

how about the Eaton building on 12th?

There is no way the County is going to rent out 200,000 sf of prime office space for storage.

I was thinking Eaton on 12th as well...

There is no way the County is going to rent out 200,000 sf of prime office space for storage.

 

Honey, this is Cuyahoga County, stranger things have happened!

^the storage is not to be in downtown per those quotes

 

Where are those 2 quotes from anyway?

It was from the original article...within 5 miles of downtown for the storage site.

^the storage is not to be in downtown per those quotes

 

Where are those 2 quotes from anyway?

 

http://pmc.pdt.cbre.com/IG/cuyahoga/hqtrs.html

 

The county administration building is to be downtown and nowhere else.

 

The storage facility is to be in the "Cleveland area" which could be downtown, but it could also be elsewhere. So the administration and the storage area could be together in the same structure IF this combined use is located downtown. If the storage facility is put somewhere outside of downtown, the administration building cannot follow it there.

Does anyone have any actual complaints about the current space planning process?

...

The real fun begins in September after the proposal deadline. Then we'll see how transparent the county really is...

This was my post from September. The bids were submitted almost 4 months ago and we hear nothing until they announce the winning proposal? There is nothing transparent about that.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/parma/index.ssf/2012/12/ed_fitzgerald_during_town_hall.html#incart_river_default

 

 

This was my post from September. The bids were submitted almost 4 months ago and we hear nothing until they announce the winning proposal? There is nothing transparent about that.

 

I encourage you to see how all public sector agencies conduct real estate transactions. What do you think might be some of the unintended consequences of conducting property transaction negotiations out in the open?

I encourage you to see how all public sector agencies conduct real estate transactions. What do you think might be some of the unintended consequences of conducting property transaction negotiations out in the open?

 

How many other public sector agencies have the checkered history of Cuyahoga county?

 

My concern is not over the money. I understand the need to negotiate in private. The city made it clear it would pick the best proposal, balancing the money and overall site design. The problem is we may never see the other proposals. This is UrbanOhio after all. Our first concern is typically site design first, everything else second. If the city picks the proposal that demos everything other than the Breuer tower for surface parking?

You'd be surprised how many public sector agencies have seen both legal and illegal corruption. Cuyahoga County is only the latest.

 

You can see the other proposals. After the winning bid is picked, the other bids can be revealed. And while we want quality design, there is no legal requirement for it. Indeed, the definition of quality design is as much a value judgment as one's definition of good art. So if you're a public official, how you do deny a project because you personally think it's ugly? That's not going to hold up in court.

You'd be surprised how many public sector agencies have seen both legal and illegal corruption. Cuyahoga County is only the latest.

 

You can see the other proposals. After the winning bid is picked, the other bids can be revealed. And while we want quality design, there is no legal requirement for it. Indeed, the definition of quality design is as much a value judgment as one's definition of good art. So if you're a public official, how you do deny a project because you personally think it's ugly? That's not going to hold up in court.

 

The city is within their rights to sell the property based on what it considers the best site proposal. So, in this case, they can deny a project because it's ugly. And ultimately, I don't trust the city to make the best possible decision. They should have consulted us. :-D

I just hope they dont try to demolish 1010 Euclid

The city? Don't you mean the county? The city isn't selling anything.

 

The best possible proposal will likely be based on the county's assessment of the prospective buyer's financial capacity to afford acquiring and developing the property. How they intend to actually design their development is for the city to consider, not the county. In Ohio, municipalities determine land use and construction plans, not the counties. And they can do so according to the law.

 

And a financial assessment is not the kind of thing a private-sector buyer wants to go through publicly. It would be like a person going to the doctor to get a physical done -- in the middle of Public Square.

You'd be surprised how many public sector agencies have seen both legal and illegal corruption. Cuyahoga County is only the latest.

 

You can see the other proposals. After the winning bid is picked, the other bids can be revealed. And while we want quality design, there is no legal requirement for it. Indeed, the definition of quality design is as much a value judgment as one's definition of good art. So if you're a public official, how you do deny a project because you personally think it's ugly? That's not going to hold up in court.

 

Hmmm, design isn't merely aesthetics, its also about function, programming, environmental performance, durability, etc.  I would highly doubt that the County isn't allowed to set objective performance standards to judge the design of a proposal by.

Hmmm, design isn't merely aesthetics, its also about function, programming, environmental performance, durability, etc.  I would highly doubt that the County isn't allowed to set objective performance standards to judge the design of a proposal by.

 

For the new site of the county administrative offices -- yes. But he was asking about the Breuer Tower. And I don't see the county getting into such level of detail on design, function, and other issues. The only issues they care about when selling a property is if the bid is the highest and most responsible one they can get. If you've attended city council, county commission, and now county council meetings, you will hear those two terms ad nauseum as they are the only two criteria that matter when awarding a bid. A circle of staffpersons unseals, reviews and scores all bids received and makes a recommendation to the legislative body on which one is the most financially beneficial to the government body and which bidder appears to be the most responsible. So in this case the county wants to know which bidder has the financial capacity to buy the property and maintain or develop it. If I was a prospective buyer and the county wanted more than that from me, including what I intend to do with the site, I'd discontinue my interest in pursuing it. That's government being far too meddlesome in a private business' affairs.

how about the Eaton building on 12th?

 

Initially, in response to the Moderators statement of the need for 400,000 sq ft, I was hypothesizing that Eaton would be a great spot because it has 300,000 of continuous space and other small spaces for additional storage.

 

http://www.cbre.us/o/cleveland/properties/eaton-center/Pages/floor-plans.aspx

 

However, from reading the subsequent conversationson on this board, such an option does not seem likely.

 

The city? Don't you mean the county? The city isn't selling anything.

Quit being pedantic. I made several references to "county" in my previous posts. It was a slip of the finger.

 

I understand what you are saying. The county's best interest is to get as much money as possible. The city's best interest is for the property to be sold to the best developer. Hopefully there is some collaboration between the two.

 

For the new site of the county administrative offices -- yes. But he was asking about the Breuer Tower. And I don't see the county getting into such level of detail on design, function, and other issues. The only issues they care about when selling a property is if the bid is the highest and most responsible one they can get. If you've attended city council, county commission, and now county council meetings, you will hear those two terms ad nauseum as they are the only two criteria that matter when awarding a bid. A circle of staffpersons unseals, reviews and scores all bids received and makes a recommendation to the legislative body on which one is the most financially beneficial to the government body and which bidder appears to be the most responsible. So in this case the county wants to know which bidder has the financial capacity to buy the property and maintain or develop it. If I was a prospective buyer and the county wanted more than that from me, including what I intend to do with the site, I'd discontinue my interest in pursuing it. That's government being far too meddlesome in a private business' affairs.

That's nonsense. Both the county and city will be involved in the sale. You said yourself the local municipality has authority over what is built through zoning, and, especially in the case of the Ameritrust complex, landmark designations. Nobody is going to submit a proposal to buy county-owned property without discussing land use plans. Who would put themselves in a position to fight with the city after spending millions? Or maybe I'm just naive in the amount of diligence both sides go through for a deal like this.

 

Hmmm, design isn't merely aesthetics, its also about function, programming, environmental performance, durability, etc.  I would highly doubt that the County isn't allowed to set objective performance standards to judge the design of a proposal by.

 

For the new site of the county administrative offices -- yes. But he was asking about the Breuer Tower. And I don't see the county getting into such level of detail on design, function, and other issues. The only issues they care about when selling a property is if the bid is the highest and most responsible one they can get. If you've attended city council, county commission, and now county council meetings, you will hear those two terms ad nauseum as they are the only two criteria that matter when awarding a bid. A circle of staffpersons unseals, reviews and scores all bids received and makes a recommendation to the legislative body on which one is the most financially beneficial to the government body and which bidder appears to be the most responsible. So in this case the county wants to know which bidder has the financial capacity to buy the property and maintain or develop it. If I was a prospective buyer and the county wanted more than that from me, including what I intend to do with the site, I'd discontinue my interest in pursuing it. That's government being far too meddlesome in a private business' affairs.

 

Oh, come on now!  The County owns the site, and is well within their rights to decide to sell or not sell for whatever reason they think is in the public interest.  This shouldn't even be controversial, I don't understand the sudden libertarianism.  The County owns it, they did the remediation and demolition already, and they will almost certainly sell below what they payed as well as further subsidize the resulting development.  Anyway, an appropriately designed project isn't part of "responsible"?  Wouldn't that impact their ability to finance and complete and fill the project?  Bringing a keystone property for Downtown to its highest and best use isn't going to impact the County's bottom line?

 

Not buying it.  And if they are following the line of reasoning you claim, I would consider that incompetent.

I've never seen a property sale come with as many strings attached as you suggest and attract a buyer. Maybe you can think of an example but I can't. And, yes, businesses are libertarian.

^Atlantic Yards?

^Atlantic Yards?

 

Any local examples? The laws of New York may differ, and certainly the economics do. An investor in New York City may be willing to put up with a lot more public sector conditions than they would here because the rents are higher, the growth prospects better and thus the payoff is much better in NYC than in Cleveland, Ohio.

I'm not sure you will find an analogous local example.  The County has never had a fire sale of its properties before, and has never sold a property such as Breuer which has such a negative backstory to it that the County simply has to get as much positive spin out fo the redevelopment as possible just to save some face.

The best positive spin the county can get out of it is by getting the most money for it from the deepest, most stable pocket to recover as much of its losses as possible. That may be of such an overriding concern to the county that it may be willing to just give the keys to the buyer with the only condition being "have a nice day."

 

I do hope you're all right that the county will want a pledge/promise from the buyer that the site will be redeveloped in such a manner and by such a time to produce the greatest benefit (jobs, income/property taxes, historic preservation etc) to the community. But that's probably just the icing on the cake.

The city? Don't you mean the county? The city isn't selling anything.

Quit being pedantic. I made several references to "county" in my previous posts. It was a slip of the finger.

 

Can't I ask to get clarification? I really didn't understand. Moving on.....

 

^the storage is not to be in downtown per those quotes

 

Where are those 2 quotes from anyway?

 

http://pmc.pdt.cbre.com/IG/cuyahoga/hqtrs.html

 

The county administration building is to be downtown and nowhere else.

 

The storage facility is to be in the "Cleveland area" which could be downtown, but it could also be elsewhere. So the administration and the storage area could be together in the same structure IF this combined use is located downtown. If the storage facility is put somewhere outside of downtown, the administration building cannot follow it there.

 

BTW, this PD article says the county wants the storage facility within 5 miles of downtown, but I've not seen anything from the county saying that. I don't doubt it tho......

http://media.cleveland.com/business_impact/photo/cuyahoga-county-sale-plansjpg-55a1624b63c0f5a0.jpg

 

I think this is all lots of fun. It's like playing sim city with some big pieces that really are in play and no one yet knows how or where they will all land. So I really can't wait to see how it will all play out. We may not fully appreciate the magnitude of what happens in the coming weeks, nor be able to grade it for the quality of the outcome for a decade or two.

 

Sometimes it's fun to be powerless and watch it all happen. That's all we can do.

^Atlantic Yards?

 

Any local examples? The laws of New York may differ, and certainly the economics do. An investor in New York City may be willing to put up with a lot more public sector conditions than they would here because the rents are higher, the growth prospects better and thus the payoff is much better in NYC than in Cleveland, Ohio.

 

The Zaremba Avenue District project is a perfect example.  City owned land sold with a specific type of redevelopment in mind.  I think X is right on this one.

Quit being pedantic. I made several references to "county" in my previous posts. It was a slip of the finger.

Can't I ask to get clarification? I really didn't understand. Moving on.....

Sorry if I was being unclear. You corrected me when I referred to the city selling the property. We both know I was talking about the county, not the city. The entire thread is about the county. Correcting me is being pedantic. You might as well correct my grammar next.

The Zaremba Avenue District project is a perfect example.  City owned land sold with a specific type of redevelopment in mind.  I think X is right on this one.

 

The city isn't selling land here. The county is. The county can't direct land use. The city can.

 

We'll see. You may be right -- especially if the county is providing incentives to help finance the development of a property it's selling. But the county has no legal standing to dictate how the land is used or designed under Ohio law. It can offer financial incentives, however.