Mssrs. Droe seem to be getting roughed up by the board here.  We don't have all the facts so let's give them some benefit of the doubt, eh?

 

Although no one has said what the tax values of all of Droes' properties are, if just this one property out of four is valued by the county at almost one million, I'm surprised that the Port Authority thinks that all four properties can be had for only $1.7 million. 

 

I don't know about any of you, but there's no way I would sell my house for anything close to the tax value -- more like double the tax value.  And I don't have a business running out of my home. 

 

Say what you will about the quality of the Beach Club experience, it is an operating business which has to count for something in the "blight" equation.  This probably gives them more of a leg to stand on in the lawsuit than an owner of a vacant building.

 

All of this certainly makes the Droes' offer of $3.5 million more reasonable in my mind.  Particularly if the alternative is legal fees and delaying the project while the Droes appeal. 

 

 

Without all of the facts it's hard to know whether even $3.5 million is reasonable. 

 

Going back to the Auditor's website, it looks like the following market rates are listed:

 

Parcel -033  $15,000

Parcel -034  $18,300

Parcel -035  $247,000

Parcel -036  $958,500

 

Total:  $1,238,800

 

So the one parcel really is the bulk of the value.  The Port's initial offer was only $1 million?  I'd be insulted too.  Not a good start to "good faith" negotiations.  $1.7 million also doesn't seem like a true market price.  The Droes' initial offer of $5 million also seems a bit out of reach though. 

 

We're still missing some of the facts.

 

Does anyone know what the two different appraisal values were?  The Port's first appraisal was higher than their second appraisal.  I'd be interested to hear what that first appraised value was and what their justification was for lowering it.

 

Also, does anyone know what value the Droes placed on the properties in the tax matter?  Did they ask for a reduced tax valuation?  And if so what was it?

 

 

 

I'd bet that unless the Port offers at least $3.5 million the Droes and their wounded pride are going to drag out the case as much as possible.  Ultimately the court decision is going to come down somewhere in between $1.7 million and $3.5 million, and the Droes will appeal. 

 

 

 

Here's hoping the project survives.

 

 

 

 

 

Probate Court docket reflects that land appropriation hearing has been rescheduled for May 7, 2007.  Hopefully it will finally go forward on this date.

Does anyone know more about Fairmount Properties, who is partnered with Wolstein to do the retail portion of the project?  I know they did First & Main in Hudson but I haven't heard about anything else they've done in the area and there website gives the impression that they've been doing a lot of sprawl development.

From Crains today.....  They need to go into one of the proposed projects downtown. 

 

Another exit from the Flats

by STAN BULLARD

 

3:21 pm, April 3, 2007

 

Another Flats landmark has shut its doors.

 

Arhaus Furniture closed its longtime clearance center at 1296 Old River Road March 31. A sign on the store directs shoppers to Arhaus’s warehouse clearance center in Brooklyn.

 

More at crainscleveland.com http://www.crainscleveland.com

Interesting.  When Arhaus first open in 1986 there was absolutely no residential component yet they apparently did good business in the Flats.  Today there  probably 2,000 people living within walking distance and the store has no traffic.  You would think with all the people coming and going in all the apartment buildings at their doorstep a furniture store would be the most likely retail tenant in the Flats.  Wonder what this says about the possibility of retail in Wolstein's project.  I have always thought this was going to be the most problematic aspect for a variety of reasons I won't bore you with, but others on this thread seem to feel it is not a concern.  Any thoughts?

 

Maybe it was because of visibility.  There were alot of people going down to the flats back then.  Retail was always risky down there, but I think Arhaus was "nice enough" to draw people in or to the flats to shop there.  I know people that live up the hill and forget its there, since they pretty much "forgot" amd assume nothing is left down there. 

I think Arhaus is too "high end" for the existing downtown residential market, with maybe the exception of some penthouse units at Pinnacle, etc.  People aren't going to pay thousands of bucks for furniture for a rental apartment, because who know where they'll move next and whether or not the furniture will fit, etc.  That being said, I think downtown can support something a more upscale than Norton... something clean, urban/contemporary and affordable too.

^ I think there is an upscale furniture store downtown in the warehouse district; Home Surroundings? or something like that, but its definately more contemporary and urban than Arhaus is, but I think its pretty upscale too. Arhaus to tell the truth is more of a suburban style decor in my opinion.

I think Arhaus is too "high end" for the existing downtown residential market, with maybe the exception of some penthouse units at Pinnacle, etc.  People aren't going to pay thousands of bucks for furniture for a rental apartment, because who know where they'll move next and whether or not the furniture will fit, etc.  That being said, I think downtown can support something a more upscale than Norton... something clean, urban/contemporary and affordable too.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was actually an Arhaus "outlet" store.  They had some reasonably priced furniture in there that I felt was very appropriate for the market they were located in.  I came over from Ohio City to find some furniture there after discovering that the two furniture stores on W. 25th are filled with over-priced left over stock from the 80s (seriously, has anyone ever been in those stores?). 

^I buy all my illegal drugs from those furniture stores. Don't be dissing them!

Mapboy, there were two Arhaus stores at one point(I am not sure if they are both still open) the regular retail store in the flats by the Watermark and the outlet store which was on w. 3rd down in the valley between the bridges. However I did a google and it shows that the outlet is now on Lorain Rd.

Hmmm...I do recall the other space, though I never went there.  I've never been to another Arhaus, but I thought this one was particularly affordable.  Maybe they had deals on the top two floors?

the Arhaus outlet in the flats is gone. I just heard someone mention it a few days ago. It moved to the burbs. I wonder what they will do with the building, I really like it. Its not in Wolsteins zone is it?

Map Boy's right - the ground floor was regular retail and the upstairs was for deals/outlet.

The history of the Flats through parties

Posted by Michael Heaton April 05, 2007 19:22PM

Categories: Arts & Life

Scott Wolstein's planned redevelopment of the east bank of the Flats into an upscale housing, retail and residential district would be merely another incarnation for an area that has gone from pestilential swampland to settlement to industrial center to entertainment district and finally to failed entertainment district.

 

For the past 200 years, the changes were brought about by people who saw what was there and thought they could do better -- and have a good time doing it.

 

More at

http://blog.cleveland.com/earlyedition/2007/04/artslife_the_history_of_the_fl.html

1801 to 1971?  nothing happened in between? 

That's bizarre. No wonder why too many Clevelanders don't appreciate their city's amazing history.

a couple of aspects of 1971 sound good  :wink: ...otherwise this is poorly written

goofy, surface-y article... and wouldn't the old Sohio/BP "Riverfests" be considered parties?  Until the 90s, when BP merged w/ Amoco/pulled up stakes for Chicago, they were the biggest thing going in the Flats, annually.

This article comes across as an unnecessary kick in the balls.  Really, the vast majority of people that went to the Flats had a good time and stayed peaceful, and then left happy.  Why try to portray the entire history of the Flats as a downward spiral of violence?  What insight do their readers gain from this?  What does the PD gain from this? 

This article comes across as an unnecessary kick in the balls.  Really, the vast majority of people that went to the Flats had a good time and stayed peaceful, and then left happy.  Why try to portray the entire history of the Flats as a downward spiral of violence?  What insight do their readers gain from this?  What does the PD gain from this? 

 

All of these are very good points... my thoughts exactly.

not to mention those old classic cleveland bands like pere ubu were more known for playing down there when it was pirate's cove than when it was peabody's, but whatev, peabodys was a good music joint. i think the minister of culture needs to retire from his pulpit, that was a painful read.

 

 

This article comes across as an unnecessary kick in the balls.  Really, the vast majority of people that went to the Flats had a good time and stayed peaceful, and then left happy.  Why try to portray the entire history of the Flats as a downward spiral of violence?  What insight do their readers gain from this?  What does the PD gain from this? 

 

All of these are very good points... my thoughts exactly.

 

yeah, I agree... leave it to a PD writer to give what was a great entertainment district a particularly negative spin.

From the Flats Oxbow Newsletter:

 

Demolition began March 2 on the eight buildings owned by developer Scott Wolstein along Old River Road within the Flats East Bank Neighborhood footprint.  To date, nearly six buildings have been razed; the balance will be complete within 30 days.  The demolition effort is on track to exceed LEED’s (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) 50% threshold for recycling debris.  This represents a significant volume of steel, brick, and wood that will not end up in a landfill. The LEED Green Building Rating System, developed by the US Green Building Council, is the nationally accepted list of standards for environmentally sustainable construction.

The Probate Court docket reflects that all the motions for summary judgment have been denied.

The Probate Court docket reflects that all the motions for summary judgment have been denied.

 

Summary judgment as requested by the hold-outs?

Yes, the remaining property holders.  Also, a partial motion for summary judgment filed by the Port Authority (relating to the issue of inability to reach an agreement...must be an element which needs to be proven in a taking action) was also denied.

So what's next?

 

 

As noted above the 1st part of the e.d. hearing (after being continued at least 4-5 times) goes forward on May 7, 2007.

As noted above the 1st part of the e.d. hearing (after being continued at least 4-5 times) goes forward on May 7, 2007.

 

I missed that one. Its hard to keep track of this. Is this mainly due to on-going negotiations? Why else would they be delaying this so often?

Since I only have the Probate Court docket to gone on I can only speculate.  The continuance orders do not provide any specificity.  Good guesses can be made based on motions filed by the parties and the stage of the proceedings.

 

It is not unusual for a case to be continued at least once before it goes to trial and often their are multiple continuance.  I would venture that 90% of all Common Pleas cases that actually go to trial have had the trial date continued at least once for a whole host of reasons.  I would also guess that at least 40% have two or more trial continuances.  Some judges are very liberal in this regard but a few just won't put up with it unless it serves their purposes.

 

From my review of the docket it looks like the earlier continuances were due to the fact that the parties had not had a chance to complete discovery (this is a common reason in any litigation).  It looks as though the parties took more than 40 depositions which takes a significant amount of time, especially when you have a number of attorneys involved.  It is often hard to coordinate schedules (after all this is not their only case).  It would appear that the more recent continuances had more to do with court having to rule on discovery motions (parties allegedly not providing the required discovery as allowed by the rules so motions are filed), the court wanting to consider the motions for summary judgment and the fact that it looks as thought the court was pressing settlement (unsuccessfully).  Again this is all pure speculation on my part.  I cannot read the the various motions and brief on line (unlike Summit County).  However, I believe I am offering some pretty educated guesses.

 

At this point settlement looks like wish full thinking.  Given property owners like George and Kassouf and certain hard headed attorneys representing the property owners, this thing is going to trial (which is conducted in two phases...the first before the judge...if he rules a taking is appropriate then the second phase...valuation...is before a jury).  My view is that the property owners think it is in their best interest to drag this out even if they lose at trial.  I believe an appeal is almost a certainty given events to date.

 

Given the foregoing I hope Wolstein is able to being implementation of the project  so he can build around the other property owners.  I hope this is in Wolstein's plans although I don't know if it is possible since I really don't know where the hold out properties are located and whether it is feasible to begin doing SOMETHING with out the holdout properties.  If not, it may be another two years before ground is broken.  Anybody have any ideas or information on this point?

Thanks for clearing that up. Some of us are not as legally literate as others.

A chance for something special on the Flats' east bank

Sunday, April 29, 2007

 

Let's face it: Cleveland-area developers haven't aimed for the stars lately when it comes to architecture and planning.

 

The local state of the art is to strive for cutesy-pie nostalgia, as in Mitchell Schneider's Disney-style Legacy Village shopping center in Lyndhurst, or to be satisfied with the solid but unexceptional contemporary look of Nathan Zaremba's Avenue development in downtown Cleveland.

 

More at cleveland.com http://www.cleveland.com

Awesome interview.  Hopefully that will bring more fleshed out drawings of what the East Bank can be.  Glad he isn't set on building to his original vision and he understands funky being good.

I'm hopeful for good architecture, but right now, I'm just glad to see this project is going to happen one way or another.  Wolstein has shown is determination by knocking down those building's he owns and clearing most of the river frontage (and much to the ire of the holdouts who, unsuccessfully, griped Scot did this to devalue their adjacent land)... Right now, I'm more function over form.  Although I don't want something hideous or acutely boring, I just want residences and retail... including a few residential and office towers thrown in the mix. 

 

Wolstein's determination to get this important project done is a breath of fresh air here in C-town.

can anyone provide any commentary on the architecture firms listed? (aside from me googleing)

The basic elements of the development include 250,000 square feet of retail, with a movie theater, shops, galleries and restaurants; 500,000 to 1 million square feet of office space; and more than 600 residential units.

 

Those numbers keep edging upward. Sounds like Wolstein is getting some serious interest from potential tenants.

 

He's also intrigued by the possibility - suggested by one of the firms he interviewed - to put a tall, landmark structure at river's edge on the northwest corner of the property.

 

VERY interesting!

Before commenting on the new information divulged in the article, a quick rant.  Can't Steve Litt begin any written piece without cutting down Cleveland in one way or another.  It really starts to get old after a while.  Maybe he should take a creative writing class and learn some new hooks.  In this particular piece I found the following comment particularly sophomoric:  "Need I mention that Cleveland passed up the opportunity to build a Gehry designed skyscraper headquarters for Progressive Corp. on the lakefront in the 1980's".  What the hell is he implying?  It is as if people where marching in the street against the design when he says "Cleveland".  Any by the way wasn't it a private corporation that decided to forego building.  He makes it sound like it was some sort of taxpayer funded project.  If I recall "Cleveland" (it's residents) would have given an arm and a leg to see that that building was built, but Progressive (and Litt's BUDDY Peter Lewis) determine that the Progressive workforce preferred the suburbs (at least that was one of the major reasons given)....more likely cooler heads decided it was cheaper to build mundane buildings in the suburbs than spend the $$$ for the signature building.  In any event it was not the people of Cleveland or its institutions that over see design and construction that put the brakes on that project.  I guess that I should be grateful that Litt did not start the piece, "In Cleveland, the poorest city in the nation"  which is one of the favorite hooks for PD writers (even if the article is about the latest in fashion footwear for women).

 

ANYWAY...I am disappointed in some of the information contained in the article.  That is utility work will not begin (at the earliest) until the fall of this year and that construction will not begin until fall of 2008 (which means 2009).  I thought the project was much further along, even with the court proceedings.

 

I am pleased to see that Wolstein is looking at having a number of different architectural firms design for the project.  This can only add interest and make the area appear as if it developed over time rather than all at once.  I really can't see Stern being a major player if Wolstein is serious when he says he is not interested in cute period architecture.  Of course love the idea of a tall signature building.  Unfortunately, it appears that we won't have any real idea of what the plan is going to be for at least a year.

maybe once Dan Gilbert gets done consolidating all his 4,500 employees in a signature structure in downtown detroit from multiple buildings in the detroit burbs he can school peter lewis on how to accomplish this.

nice interview and update on what is going on, but I too thought things were further along. I hope they can pull this together. Even if the architecture is not outdtanding, something new down there is better than nothing. I'd settle for something like Newport/Levee in Cincitucky.

^A Newport type place on the Ebank would be OK as long as there was no interior mallish portion. This is a neighborhood he's building not an isolated entertainmentplex. The venues at NPOL would be cool, just not Newports form.

Even if the Port loses and Wolstein has to pony up more cash, he said his project will go ahead.

 

This was nice to read.

 

Before commenting on the new information divulged in the article, a quick rant.  Can't Steve Litt begin any written piece without cutting down Cleveland in one way or another.  It really starts to get old after a while.  Maybe he should take a creative writing class and learn some new hooks.  In this particular piece I found the following comment particularly sophomoric:  "Need I mention that Cleveland passed up the opportunity to build a Gehry designed skyscraper headquarters for Progressive Corp. on the lakefront in the 1980's". 

 

I agree. Besides, didn't the loss of the progressive tower have more to do with personality clashes between the White administration and Lewis as opposed to how "Cleveland passed up the opportunity."

I'm not a fan of Newport on the Levee. Its just too touristy and generic.

 

The East Bank is interesting to me, because I cant quite figure out where Wolstein is going with it other than he wants it to be a "neighborhood". For instance I think I understand what Zaremba, MRN, and Stark have in mind in terms of the type of neighborhood and market. I think creating some kind of niche or unique vision is important for succesful developments like this.

 

I think it would be kind of cool for the Flats East Bank to capitlize on the growing "Green" culture and market. With its riverfront location and light rail access I think it could capitalize on the environmentally conscious, and people who like to enjoy the outdoors. I'd like to see a bicycle shop and rental, kayak shop, Whole Foods, Roots, health-food restaurants, etc. Maybe something like a downtown version of Coventry. The uniqueness of the neighborhood and niche is important in attracting not only people to live there but visit and support the retail as well. We're getting a number of interesting mixed-use developments in the area now, and they shouldn't all have a Cheesecake Factory.

I'd like to see a bicycle shop and rental, kayak shop, Whole Foods, Roots, health-food restaurants, etc. Maybe something like a downtown version of Coventry.

 

Ohhh! and Subarus. Don't forget, Subarus for everybody!!! :)

 

 

 

 

and yes I actually drive one.

nice interview and update on what is going on, but I too thought things were further along. I hope they can pull this together. Even if the architecture is not outdtanding, something new down there is better than nothing. I'd settle for something like Newport/Levee in Cincitucky.

 

I'm a little put off, but not surprised by this delay... the street/sewers reconfig and rebuilding is massive even for this relatively small plot.  Wolstein has to wait for full property control either by winning in court or losing and negotiating a buy out... I'd like it to move faster but, at the very least, I'm thrilled Wolstein is saying, he's moving forward and not tying this thing up in court further if he loses; he'll settle with these jerks and move forward...

 

... yeah, Litt's getting tiresome with his pinhead putdowns and, yes, the Progressive slap is both gratuitous and inaccurate-- and, for that matter, given Frank Gehry's, er, eccentric style, are we really that worse off by having only his Peter B/Weatherhead building at Case? -- not that I wouldn't love a Progressive tower teaming with those 5,000+ workers downtown... a tower by the guy who, White or no White Admin, planted his huge corp out in Mayfield and, yet, has since taken every opportunity to lecture the city constantly, particularly UCI, over its supposed lack of vision (much like another major POTENTIAL downtown player-cum suburb: Bob Stark)...

... must be nice to lecture Cleveland about the problem when there's truly are, themselves, a major reason for it...

 

I hope Jimmy's comes back :)

We've known for about 2 years now that the preliminary utility work was to take about a year. Check back on this thread and you'll find it mentioned a few times.

That article made me seriously excited again for this project.  And I am very psyched Wolstein is thinking about using multiple architects.  Though none discussed in the article really excited me so much (don't know anything about FORUM though), they at least sound decently competent.

 

Before commenting on the new information divulged in the article, a quick rant.  Can't Steve Litt begin any written piece without cutting down Cleveland in one way or another.  It really starts to get old after a while. 

 

I have no problems with Litt's style- I think he's dead on.  Just look at Unversity Hospitals, the Clinic, the County (maybe a little premature...), etc.  For a town with so little constrcution activity, our local institutions have a serious knack for blowing it.

 

The Progressive issue is pretty tricky.  Who knows what really happened.  Yeah, it's pretty lazy to say "Cleveland" screwed that up, but it does sounds like a complete lack of vision by the White administration plus the the alienating clannishnes of the corporate dinosaurs (one down side of all those fortune 500 companies?) really did play a big role in the project's demise.  And I think it really would have been a cool project.

 

The city wouldn't give Progressive tax abatement if I remember correctly.  It's not like 5,000 people working and spending downtown would offset property tax losses....  Thanks Mike White.

The city wouldn't give Progressive tax abatement if I remember correctly.  It's not like 5,000 people working and spending downtown would offset property tax losses....  Thanks Mike White.

 

Don't blame it ALL on mike white either.  Other business' weighed in on that decision as well.  Progressive and the Hilton Corp have held grudges against Cleveland since they couldn't build on the Mall. I'm glad to have the open space in our downtown and its added historic value.

 

I mean I can't imagine the crap that would be built on the mall, if both of those companies would have been allowed to proceed.  it wouldn't fit in with Music Hall/Public Hall and (probably) would have make the Mall a dark dreary space.