^I can't imagine they'd go ahead with only 60% sold.  I base that on the simple fact that the units really weren't selling.  If it takes them 5 years to sell 60% I can't see them pushing forward with another phase right away.  And now with all the litigation I'm guessing they're going to have to completely change their strategy.

 

Well, keep in mind this was told to me quite a while ago. So strategy may have very well changed since then.

60% may be the number of sales they need to pay off the bank based on the release prices per unit. It would seem an aggressive payoff, but that might explain the philosophy behind that specific percentage.

 

As to the timing of sales, I'm sure they've considered that the legal issues, and the economy have slowed sales, and that once those issues are resolved, demand will pick back up. Developers are eternal optimists.

^ Sounds like their best option at this point.

I still wouldn't choose that area in its current state to rent. I would like it though if they built more and just decided to make it all rental!

 

Why do you say this?

The rental part? Cause right now condos aren't selling, and it would be even harder to find financing. I think if they built more apartments in the area, the district could take off. Then at that point you can start building condos.

The rental part? Cause right now condos aren't selling, and it would be even harder to find financing. I think if they built more apartments in the area, the district could take off. Then at that point you can start building condos.

 

No, sorry, the part where you said "I still wouldn't choose that area in its current state to rent".

The rental part? Cause right now condos aren't selling, and it would be even harder to find financing. I think if they built more apartments in the area, the district could take off. Then at that point you can start building condos.

 

I'm mystfied as to why they built that loft building for the market they did.  Its surroundings simply don't appeal to that market.  The rest of the buildout should be more targeted toward the growing university that's only a few blocks away.  Seriously, where else do you see ultra-pricey condos built in a run down area next to a college?  It makes no sense.

The rental part? Cause right now condos aren't selling, and it would be even harder to find financing. I think if they built more apartments in the area, the district could take off. Then at that point you can start building condos.

 

No, sorry, the part where you said "I still wouldn't choose that area in its current state to rent".

 

Not enough going on in that area quite yet in my opinion. There are several other options in the city that I would choose first currently. Just not at the top of my list. Someday...who knows

I think many would feel it is in a rather secluded and desolate area with just the one building, even though it is just a stone’s throw from many things, including you Doc Broc.

 

Also, they used very expensive construction methods for this building, so I think many wouldn’t be able to justify paying those prices for something that isn’t on Public Square or on the water and instead in the mentioned spot…

 

If after the rent-out of the remaining units, and in the semi near future they decide to build additional building with the idea of renting, they would likely either have to build a much cheaper product or wait till there truly is a better market for these types of units.

 

At the current (last active) prices for these units, it would minimally require about $3,500 a month in rent for the smaller units, which may be a bit unrealistic for Cleveland and as well for this spot. 

 

I think many would feel it is in a rather secluded and desolate area with just the one building, even though it is just a stones throw from many things, including you Doc Broc.

 

Also, they used very expensive construction methods for this building, so I think many wouldnt be able to justify paying those prices for something that isnt on Public Square or on the water and instead in the mentioned spot

 

If after the rent-out of the remaining units, and in the semi near future they decide to build additional building with the idea of renting, they would likely either have to build a much cheaper product or wait till there truly is a better market for these types of units.

 

At the current (last active) prices for these units, it would minimally require about $3,500 a month in rent for the smaller units, which may be a bit unrealistic for Cleveland and as well for this spot. 

 

 

I don't know - it depends on what you want.  As great as say, W. 6th, is for walkability, I personally don't want people puking at my doorstep at 2am on the weekends.  Those of us who live there value a slight bit more quiet-ness with the advantage that we can still walk everywhere.

 

Also, Willy, I don't know how you did your calculations, but for our townhouse (which cost the same as one of the 1bdr condo units), we only pay about $1500/month for our mortgage (5% down).  I'm assuming you calculated that for them to not take 30 years to recoup the full purchase price :).

The unit we looked at which was one of the cheapest and smallest (but was actually a 2 bedroom (one which was only big enough to be an office) was just under $600,000.  There were a few that were a little bit cheaper but not much.  Also the monthly fees were another factor on top of that for us. 

 

I thought the Townhouses were in the upper 200's? 

 

*edit  DocBroc you may be right about if it was rental building...  I know in our building in DC, people are renting "owned units" which are valued at around $400,000, so most people are paying around $2,600 a month, but that is likely to meet the owners mortgage...  A rental building would work a bit differently, but I still think it would need to be pretty pricey for Cleveland.   

The unit we looked at which was one of the cheapest and smallest (but was actually a 2 bedroom was just under $600,000.  There were a few that were a little bit cheaper but not much.  Also the monthly fees were another factor on top of that for us. 

 

I thought the Townhouses were in the upper 200's? 

 

Saywhatnow?  Were you looking on like the 8th floor or something?  The smaller units on the lower floors were only in the mid $200,000-300,000s.

Yeah, really we were all over that building  :drunk:(I even have dvd's of the material).....  Maybe since then they were having a fire sale?  I swear the cheapest things (small 1 bedroom) were in the 400's, and the top units were over 1 million... 

 

The square footage price was more than anything I have seen in that market (comparable to DC prices), but they explained how that was a result of the expensive and solid construction methods that were used.?

Yeah, really we were all over that building  :drunk:(I even have dvd's of the material).....  Maybe since then they were having a fire sale?  I swear the cheapest things (small 1 bedroom) were in the 400's, and the top units were over 1 million... 

 

The square footage price was more than anything I have seen in that market (comparable to DC prices), but they explained how that was a result of the expensive and solid construction methods that were used.?

 

No, we started looking in 2007, and the lower level units were in the $200,000-300,000 range.  The smallest unit on the second floor was $239k, IIRC.  But the units are more expensive when compared to the townhomes, because of the fact the building is post-tensioned concrete instead of steel.  That thing is a friggin' rock.

I'm mystfied as to why they built that loft building for the market they did.  Its surroundings simply don't appeal to that market.  The rest of the buildout should be more targeted toward the growing university that's only a few blocks away.  Seriously, where else do you see ultra-pricey condos built in a run down area next to a college?  It makes no sense.

 

It's not really next to a college...  I mean, it's by CSU, but it's not on that campus.  I think that it would appeal to their target market if the whole project was done.  But as it just - just one lone building standing there and some townhouses down the street - I agree with you.

^ I think the location made more sense from the perspective of the entire project. The Avenue project was, to my memory, supposed to cover the entire block on E. 12th where this building is located, plus there were plans to demolish the parking lot to the south, as well as possibly construct some buildings in front of the One Cleveland Center parking garage (in the green area surrounding the garage with the man-made hills and small running area). I believe I saw plans that had all of those projects included, which made much more sense for this building. Unfortunately it's hard to make a multi-stage plan work when the economy suddenly crashes...

Nothing wrong with the location for expensive new housing, as can be seen in many another city! Within three blocks: Playhouse Square, Chesterfield, Union Club, E. 9th corridor of law and financial district offices.  What the whole project needs is SYNERGY - that's the key to the great success of East 4th and the Warehouse District condos and apartments.

 

Never mind the "five years" it's taken; you're including this miserable lawsuit when, as some has said, it appears nothing can be sold and new ground broken. (You wouldn't know any of this from the project's website, though....) :-(

I haven't given a sales update in a while......

 

We got one new neighbor in the townhomes a couple months ago, and they just started working on the interior of another one they sold.  There were in negotiations for a third unit, but I don't know the current status.  If that sale goes through, we're down to 3 existing units left out of 20 to sell.

I haven't given a sales update in a while......

 

We got one new neighbor in the townhomes a couple months ago, and they just started working on the interior of another one they sold.  There were in negotiations for a third unit, but I don't know the current status.  If that sale goes through, we're down to 3 existing units left out of 20 to sell.

 

There are only 3 units left to sell in that building?

I haven't given a sales update in a while......

 

We got one new neighbor in the townhomes a couple months ago, and they just started working on the interior of another one they sold.  There were in negotiations for a third unit, but I don't know the current status.  If that sale goes through, we're down to 3 existing units left out of 20 to sell.

 

There are only 3 units left to sell in that building?

 

Townhomes, yes.

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

I read in Crain's Cleveland Business that the legal situation has been resolved and that they are going to convert the Avenue District into rental property. Maybe that's why the website hasn't been updated.

 

"In an effort to bring the foreclosure case to a close, an unidentified investor has joined with a group formed by Mr. Zaremba, his brothers, Walter and Tim, and contractor Panzica Cos. to acquire the troubled Avenue District property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. Huntington Bank also has agreed to help finance the purchase of the tower, which would become a rental property instead of condos.

 

 

Those revelations came as lawyers for the banks and the developer agreed to private mediation in a hearing last Wednesday, July 20, in Judge John P. O'Donnell's courtroom in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110725/FREE/307259967

Yes, thats all been covered here already.

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

I read in Crain's Cleveland Business that the legal situation has been resolved and that they are going to convert the Avenue District into rental property. Maybe that's why the website hasn't been updated.

 

"In an effort to bring the foreclosure case to a close, an unidentified investor has joined with a group formed by Mr. Zaremba, his brothers, Walter and Tim, and contractor Panzica Cos. to acquire the troubled Avenue District property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. Huntington Bank also has agreed to help finance the purchase of the tower, which would become a rental property instead of condos.

 

 

Those revelations came as lawyers for the banks and the developer agreed to private mediation in a hearing last Wednesday, July 20, in Judge John P. O'Donnell's courtroom in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110725/FREE/307259967

 

The townhomes have nothing to do with that legal battle.  We got drug in in error at first, but that was resolved within a couple of months.  And yes, the apartment conversion talk has been going on for a while now.  It's just that the legal system takes for.ev.er.  I'm not sure why their website has not been updated with respect to the townhome sales.

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

I read in Crain's Cleveland Business that the legal situation has been resolved and that they are going to convert the Avenue District into rental property. Maybe that's why the website hasn't been updated.

 

"In an effort to bring the foreclosure case to a close, an unidentified investor has joined with a group formed by Mr. Zaremba, his brothers, Walter and Tim, and contractor Panzica Cos. to acquire the troubled Avenue District property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. Huntington Bank also has agreed to help finance the purchase of the tower, which would become a rental property instead of condos.

 

 

Those revelations came as lawyers for the banks and the developer agreed to private mediation in a hearing last Wednesday, July 20, in Judge John P. O'Donnell's courtroom in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110725/FREE/307259967

 

The townhomes have nothing to do with that legal battle.  We got drug in in error at first, but that was resolved within a couple of months.  And yes, the apartment conversion talk has been going on for a while now.  It's just that the legal system takes for.ev.er.  I'm not sure why their website has not been updated with respect to the townhome sales.

Oh ok. Didn't know the townhomes weren't included in that. Btw, how have the sales been as far as those townhomes are concerned?

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

I read in Crain's Cleveland Business that the legal situation has been resolved and that they are going to convert the Avenue District into rental property. Maybe that's why the website hasn't been updated.

 

"In an effort to bring the foreclosure case to a close, an unidentified investor has joined with a group formed by Mr. Zaremba, his brothers, Walter and Tim, and contractor Panzica Cos. to acquire the troubled Avenue District property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. Huntington Bank also has agreed to help finance the purchase of the tower, which would become a rental property instead of condos.

 

 

Those revelations came as lawyers for the banks and the developer agreed to private mediation in a hearing last Wednesday, July 20, in Judge John P. O'Donnell's courtroom in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110725/FREE/307259967

 

The townhomes have nothing to do with that legal battle.  We got drug in in error at first, but that was resolved within a couple of months.  And yes, the apartment conversion talk has been going on for a while now.  It's just that the legal system takes for.ev.er.  I'm not sure why their website has not been updated with respect to the townhome sales.

Oh ok. Didn't know the townhomes weren't included in that. Btw, how have the sales been as far as those townhomes are concerned?

 

*Looks up to post from this morning*

The website for Avenue District says there are no  lofts or penthouses available at this time. Are those sold as well?

 

No, they're not currently on the market due to the ongoing legal situation as has been discussed here.  And I don't think anyone has been updating the website, because there are sold townhomes still listed there.

I read in Crain's Cleveland Business that the legal situation has been resolved and that they are going to convert the Avenue District into rental property. Maybe that's why the website hasn't been updated.

 

"In an effort to bring the foreclosure case to a close, an unidentified investor has joined with a group formed by Mr. Zaremba, his brothers, Walter and Tim, and contractor Panzica Cos. to acquire the troubled Avenue District property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. Huntington Bank also has agreed to help finance the purchase of the tower, which would become a rental property instead of condos.

 

 

Those revelations came as lawyers for the banks and the developer agreed to private mediation in a hearing last Wednesday, July 20, in Judge John P. O'Donnell's courtroom in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court."

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110725/FREE/307259967

 

The townhomes have nothing to do with that legal battle.  We got drug in in error at first, but that was resolved within a couple of months.  And yes, the apartment conversion talk has been going on for a while now.  It's just that the legal system takes for.ev.er.  I'm not sure why their website has not been updated with respect to the townhome sales.

Oh ok. Didn't know the townhomes weren't included in that. Btw, how have the sales been as far as those townhomes are concerned?

 

*Looks up to post from this morning*

Smarty-pants. lol. Sorry. Didn't see that  :oops:

NBD :).

There's absolutely no excuse for having an out-of-date website.  For several years they had a hyper, ever-changing, trendy website designed to allure.  Now they've got plenty misleading information. It should be updated or removed altogether, period.  The most public-friendly choice would be to remove all that's there that's not currently correct and some sort of explanation of the delay inserted. General information on hopes and dreams is fine, as long as it's clear a lot of it hasn't materialized - yet. 

 

Not even one commercial space occupied, for example.

^I think they have a lot more important stuff to deal with than updating their website...especially when the future of the project, due to developments, is still in flux.

I wonder when the building on East 12th will be converted to apartments.  At least it will bring some new apartment options to downtown. 

The apartment deal is supposed to be settled soon.  I think the final agreement was supposed to be settled this month.

There's absolutely no excuse for having an out-of-date website.

 

How about having no money?

I know this is pie in the sky, but I sure hope that once the deal is sealed, the lawsuit settled and all the disgruntled subcontractors paid (although I guess they have a right to be disgruntled if they supplied materials and performed services and were not paid for ages...and now probably at well less than contracted price)...a new developer comes in and at least finishes Phase One as apartments.  Given the downtown demand for apartments and the fact that all the preliminary work has been done for them (arch. drawings, site prep work) that, from a development stand point, it could be a bargain and and a real profit generator for the right developer (that is somebody with assets who can obtain financing).  Of course it also depends on whether the current owner wants to deal now that this is all over with.  If I were them..I would be drooling for a deal after all they have been through.

 

One good thing....lots of lawyers made lots of money over the past few years...nothing wrong with that :-)

^Zaremba might be a lousy developer, but he is one helluva 'job creator'

^Zaremba might be a lousy developer, but he is one helluva 'job creator'

....snicker....

What do you all (especially the residents of the Avenue District) think of this building wrap/weather shield proposed for the parking garage at East 12th and Hamilton Avenue that used to be a Firestone store and now has Kia Motors in it?

 

Project description.....

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2011/11182011/12th_Garage_Wind_Shield_Proposal_Final_1.pdf

 

 

"Therefore this facility has a considerable competitive disadvantage among other garages in the city that all have a name and identity in the attraction and retention parking tenants to sustain economic vitality in Cleveland."

 

I think the E.V. Bishoff Company is in the market for a document proofreader.

 

As a non-resident I like it well enough to say I'm not indifferent about it.  To date I haven't been turned off by garages using the same sort of technique on their exteriors.  Assuming they use a high resolution graphic for the actual job, thumbs up.

I have no problem with it. It will bring some nice color to the area.

It took me a few minutes to figure out which garage it was (before reading the document) when i saw it on the CPC site

 

wouldn't it be cool if the YMCA decided to move from Prospect to the Galleria?

wouldn't it be cool if the YMCA decided to move from Prospect to the Galleria?

 

What are you hinting at?

wouldn't it be cool if the YMCA decided to move from Prospect to the Galleria?

 

What are you hinting at?

 

that the downtown YMCA is moving from Prospect to the galleria

^source?

wouldn't it be cool if the YMCA decided to move from Prospect to the Galleria?

 

No.

I think it would be a great idea.

I would be all for it, except my biggest beef with the current location is their basketball court.  You can't shoot a baseline 3 point jumper without nailing the underside of the overhead track.

 

I don't see how they would accomodate a full size bball court in the Galleria (Or a track for that matter).

did you forget about the enormous sports club on thegarage across St Clair from the galleria?

^ I think that place closed a few years ago.

 

Also,  the YMCA did a sale-leaseback with CSU a couple of years ago with a 5 year lease.  The YMCA will have to move in the near future.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2009/09/cleveland_state_university_buy.html

Avenue Tower condos inch closer to sheriff's sale

Lenders on high-profile and long-stalled project owed more than $40M

By STAN BULLARD

4:30 am, February 27, 2012

 

Whether Avenue Tower — the stalled, litigation-riddled condominium project in downtown Cleveland — eventually winds up as apartments or condos soon may become a relevant question.

 

After more than two years of litigation, lenders are on the cusp of receiving court approval to seize ownership of the 58-unit condo property at 1211 St. Clair Ave. from developer Nathan Zaremba's Zaremba Inc.

 

Judge John O'Donnell of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas has asked lenders that provided more than $40 million in loans to the project to draft jointly and submit to him a proposed judgment entry by this Thursday, March 1. The entry should include estimates of how much the various lenders are owed as of that date. The document could set the stage for a sheriff's sale of the ballyhooed project, which has been in foreclosure proceedings since Feb. 4, 2010.

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20120227/SUB1/302279980

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/03/ymca_to_move_downtown_branch_i.html

 

YMCA to move downtown branch into Galleria, taking 30 percent of the former mall's retail space

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The YMCA of Greater Cleveland will move its downtown branch into the Galleria at Erieview, illustrating how developers and tenants are dreaming up creative ways to remake old retail space.

A 40,000-square-foot fitness facility, including a three-lane lap pool, will fill the southeast section of the glassed-in former mall in downtown Cleveland.

Building owner Werner Minshall plans to donate the space to the YMCA, which will undertake a $9 million renovation that could be finished in early 2014.

The deal is a much-needed win for an iconic property in a key downtown district.