Jump to content

Featured Replies

In a perfect world, I'd agree with you. But the city can't mold a market where there is very little market.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Views 171.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • I talked to a resident there ~2 weeks ago who is friends with some of the management, he said the building is 53% occupied and 86% leased, the difference being the number of new leases they've signed

  • Current:   2013:  

  • sonisharri
    sonisharri

    Some more angles from today…

Posted Images

I don't see how our market is uniquely divorced from all the positive changes in urban planning over the last few decades, or from modern car-free lifestyle trends.  "The market" nationwide is clamoring for walkable mixed-use neighborhoods.  Frankly it's all the rage.  People are moving to Portland without even having jobs there, because they're so dead-set on living in that kind of environment.  How can we seriously claim there's no demand for it here? 

 

The not-especially-marketable nature of this development illustrates the correlation between what "is demanded" in Cleveland and what its absurdly outdated city government chooses to subsidize.

I agree with 327 on the portion facing Superior.  Let's not the mortgage the future with bad urban planning, unless Cleveland wants to remain a city with pockets of walkability.  Not to mention, we have Masthead Brewing going in one block up (https://www.facebook.com/MastheadBrewingCo/) and there is a commercial building immediately next door.  This is the definition of infill.  This just may be bad public policy allowing for this to be built.

 

As one of the guys who moved to Portland OR, I can attest to how  the majority of new structures on major roads include some form of retail/commercial facing the road or blvd.  Walkability remains the focus of city codes and urban planning.  Many neighborhoods are even knocking down residential to put in such structures/mixed-use buildings.  Here's a cool interactive map showing the development/infill in the city http://www.nextportland.com

How do you build vertically when you don't have enough demand to generate high enough rents to offset Cleveland's high construction costs? There's only so many subsidies, especially for new construction.

 

BTW how's that retail coming at the existing Avenue District high-rise? Until that fills, you won't see very many more mixed use buildings at the fringe of downtown.

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

I don't see how our market is uniquely divorced from all the positive changes in urban planning over the last few decades, or from modern car-free lifestyle trends.  "The market" nationwide is clamoring for walkable mixed-use neighborhoods.  Frankly it's all the rage.  People are moving to Portland without even having jobs there, because they're so dead-set on living in that kind of environment.  How can we seriously claim there's no demand for it here? 

 

The not-especially-marketable nature of this development illustrates the correlation between what "is demanded" in Cleveland and what its absurdly outdated city government chooses to subsidize.

 

The market that matters is the market here locally. That's what matters. If you can't get the investors to give you the money in THIS market to build it in THIS market, it doesn't matter where it's "all the rage" at elsewhere. That's the bottom line. You have to deal with the realities on the ground in the market in which you live. Now if u got a billion dollars and you can spend what you want, then go for it

Seems to be that we need an urban growth boundary and very progressive zoning code coupled with drastically different funding at the state level if we're trying to be Portland. That being said, even if we're comfortable being Cleveland instead of Portland, there are things our region can do to improve the market. Make it easier for developers to build density. Stop catering to vehicular interests. Reward good urban form. Until these things are done... you can't expect the market to cater to "Portlandy desires."

 

Bringing this back on topic. I see this Zimmerman project as a good first step. Sure it's not 7 stories, but it's infill in an area that's sorely in need of more people.

uoaxe1.jpg

 

Hey guys, let's keep this to discussion of the Avenue District itself.  If you want to start a thread for construction costs, City retail policy, or the price of tea in China please feel free to start that thread, in the appropriate subforum.  some of them already exist.  Use them please.

With the new ownership of erieview tower I wonder if its interaction with street level can be inproved. There was mention of improving the lobby. Maybe the structure can be extending to the front both towards the south and east to be more pedestrian friendly i.e. less erieview plan. I think that and getting something built around the One Cleveland Center parking garage would do wonders to the area.

 

As far as the townhouse going up and the ones already there. I think they miss the mark bigtime. You have a chance to build a unique downtown neighborhood that could be highly sought after for generations to come. This is not that at all. Even considering the curent market restrictions, these are way off base. But im not developer putting up the $ so I digress.

  • 4 weeks later...

^Wrong thread.  I think you are confusing the Avenue District with the Avenue at Tower City.  By the way do they still even call it that?

 

Yep they do!

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2016/03/dan_gilbert_buys_the_avenue_sh.html

 

Anyhow to get somewhat on topic, there is a hair salon coming to this Avenue District. It will be interesting to see how it will do considering the current residential is maybe only a third the amount that was originally planned.

  • 1 month later...

As much as I love new apartments and residents downtown, I was happy to hear they have no interest at all in changing the use from offices. Even more exciting, they are actively courting companies from outside Cleveland/NEO!  :-)

I also really like what they're doing with the part of this building that's facing Lakeside.

I also really like what they're doing with the part of this building that's facing Lakeside.

 

Agree. It's amazing what a fairly simple canopy can do for the look.

Remember: It's the Year of the Snake

45 Erieview chnages hands. Article includes a rendering of potential exterior renovation.

 

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2016/12/45_erieview_office_tower_in_do.html#incart_river_home

 

The article hints that the new owner is looking at attracting out-of-town tenants.  Given the buyers NYC connection, I have to think it's fair to assume they have some prospects lined up.  An acquaintance of mine in NYC says his firm is desperate to move their "back office" work out of that city because of real estate costs and the difficulty of hiring lower-level employees.

Remember: It's the Year of the Snake

The article hints that the new owner is looking at attracting out-of-town tenants.  Given the buyers NYC connection, I have to think it's fair to assume they have some prospects lined up.  An acquaintance of mine in NYC says his firm is desperate to move their "back office" work out of that city because of real estate costs and the difficulty of hiring lower-level employees.

 

Bring those "back office" jobs to Cleveland!!!  :-D

  • 3 weeks later...

Interesting....

 

55 ERIEVIEW PLAZA

CLEVELAND

 

Sales Date 12/29/2016

Amount $1,530,000

Buyer ALTO 55 ERIEVIEW, LLC

Seller 2105 ONTARIO, LLC

Deed type WARRANTY D

Land value $585,000

Building value $115,000

Total value $700,000

Parcel 101-34-051

Property Office buildings 3 or more stories (elevator)

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

  • 2 weeks later...

1485210728483587269372.jpg

 

Just took this on Rockwell... They came out better than I expected! They have a very nice look to them that I know this one pic will do little to show. I'll go back when there's more daylight to work with. Well done!

Buy now, while each unit includes a porta potty!  This deal won't last forever.

Possibly the ugliest town homes in the City.

^ Yeah they're really really bad. I hope something gets built on the lot just southwest of it (between E. 14, E. 15, and Superior) soon so these ugly townhomes aren't so noticeable from Superior.

They look the same as all those townhouses in Battery Park and infilled throughout Ohio City and Tremont to me.

Serious question for those in the know-

 

Why are so many of these projects built with flat roofs? Aren't flat roofs the most problematic, and therefor the most expensive to repair and maintain?  I have had one flat roof repair/replacement in my experience. The cost took my breath away.

Serious question for those in the know-

 

Why are so many of these projects built with flat roofs? Aren't flat roofs the most problematic, and therefor the most expensive to repair and maintain?  I have had one flat roof repair/replacement in my experience. The cost took my breath away.

 

This is a can of worms issue. I've never seen a flat roof that didn't leak, but I'm told (condescendingly!) by some architects that they perform just as well as a peaked roof.

 

 

For that part of town, they're fine. Better than a vacant lot. I walked past them the other day and they do look better in the flesh.

My hovercraft is full of eels

Those short little sign posts with the LARGE signs weird me out me every time I see them.

 

Are they like that because of Burke height restrictions? </troll>

Really not a fan of the cinder block foundation I cringe every time I ride past them. The bland color scheme doesn't help either.

These townhomes are a big improvement to the ugly vacant lot that had been sitting there for decades. Townhome living options are helpful for those searching for variety downtown.

 

When developers produce big, flashy, beautiful renderings, such as NuCleus, they usually never get done because financing is challenging.

Serious question for those in the know-

 

Why are so many of these projects built with flat roofs? Aren't flat roofs the most problematic, and therefor the most expensive to repair and maintain?  I have had one flat roof repair/replacement in my experience. The cost took my breath away.

 

This is a can of worms issue. I've never seen a flat roof that didn't leak, but I'm told (condescendingly!) by some architects that they perform just as well as a peaked roof.

 

 

 

They don't put pitched roofs on 3-story townhomes because it would push the height in many locations over the 35' height restriction per zoning code.

Serious question for those in the know-

 

Why are so many of these projects built with flat roofs? Aren't flat roofs the most problematic, and therefor the most expensive to repair and maintain?  I have had one flat roof repair/replacement in my experience. The cost took my breath away.

 

Yes, short term thinking they are expensive. Most will last 30 years if done right. You will most likely reshingle twice in that period. Also, I have yet to see an rooftop deck on a sloped roof and condensing units looks horrible when they are attached on sloped roofs or to the sides of buildings. There are trade-offs for density.

 

Really not a fan of the cinder block foundation I cringe every time I ride past them. The bland color scheme doesn't help either.

 

Cinder blocks stopped being used in the early 1900's.

better than an empty lot for sure, but those cinderblock townhouses are really testing my 'forget appearances, just bring in the bodies downtown' mantra...!

 

 

For that part of town, they're fine. Better than a vacant lot. I walked past them the other day and they do look better in the flesh.

 

true and that is good to hear --

"Better than an empty lot" is the reason we get so much rubbish.  Our only standard is profit as much as you can as easily as possible.  That means using off-the-shelf designs equally suited for anywhere and ill-suited for their context.

Yes I agree with you.  But, have you ever tried to secure a multi million dollar loan for a residential project?  Banks can be brutal.

Banks have nothing to do with bad design, and using them as an excuse is pandering to bad developers and architects.

 

Those look fine in comparison and, to make it worse, this stuff here is not low-income.  We're selling cinderblock and siding as an upscale investment, and we're selling suburban height/density limits and use-segregation right in the core of the city. 

I like that pic...!!!

Regarding the Avenue District town homes on Lindazzo Avenue, Superior, East 14th/15th blocks. I agree with the people saying that they wished there was more height especially the new one fronting Superior. I also agree they could have been little more appealing visually. That said, I think with a more urban infrastructure design they would be more palatable, to me at least. I was trying to visualize what a urban neighborhood in that area should look like in my mind and ended up transferring that to some visuals in gimp. All I did really is reduce the infrastructure for the city.

 

The view is looking North on E 14th from Lindazzo.

 

First is the current view. Second is the updated infrastructure. Third is what it would look like with the west side filled in with a copy of the existing town homes on the east side of 14th.

 

 

 

  • 2 weeks later...

No way they are getting 2400-2500

Hundred. Insanity

  • 3 months later...

Any pics posted anywhere?

Any pics posted anywhere?

 

They should be posted on the city's planning web page w/in the next week. 

Here's a few of the renders. More at the link below...

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2017/06022017/index.php

 

DOWNTOWN/FLATS DESIGN REVIEW

DF2017-040 – The Avenue District Townhomes New Construction: Seeking Final Approval

Project Location: Superior Avenue between East 13th and East 15th Streets

Project Representative: Ryan Grass, City Architecture

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_02.jpg

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_08.jpg

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_13.jpg

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_14.jpg

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_15.jpg

 

Avenue_Distirct_Img_18.jpg

"In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

I'm glad something is being built on these lots.  But can't the city put Superior Avenue on a road diet.  That road is way too wide and it makes these townhomes seem way out of scale. 

That road is way too wide and it makes these townhomes seem way out of scale.

 

Is that the road's fault?  "The Avenue" has always seemed a little haphazard, as if they built whatever they figured would sell or rent at the moment.

Remember: It's the Year of the Snake

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.