Real estate prices are getting too high for a Subway and GNC on Public Square... Or not.

That Sushi 86 is likely to expand, and a Jimmy Johns opened two doors down :-)

Is the spot directly east of Jimmy Johns going to be the pizza shop from the E. 4th thread?

 

Once the ECTP is finished and we have nice new sidewalks and streetscape in place, we've got to get these restaurants from E. 4th to Ontario to open sidewalk seating.  This will make such a huge difference for that quadrant of the Square!

 

And back on topic...moving towards Pesht, the blocks directly NW of the square have to push for the same thing...

Is the spot directly east of Jimmy Johns going to be the pizza shop from the E. 4th thread?

 

Only if you ask nicely.

Pretty please?  With outdoor seating on top?

Their figure is for the entire city, not just downtown, but last year the Census Bureau estimated that Cleveland has a daytime population of 593,243. I could dig up a GIS layer showing AGS estimates of employees by block group, but my data's fairly old at this point.

Now THAT I can believe.

Stark was on WCPN this morning in a taped interview talking about the "Decline of an American City" documentary. I didn't hear his whole spot but loved when he got annoyed with interviewer Dan Malthrope for being too negative about Cleveland's future. Stark admonished him in his closing words to "Always be positive about Cleveland." I couldn't help but respond with a quick "Loves it."

 

Podcast: http://www.wcpn.org/podcast/audio/2006/12/1211soi.mp3

^^First, this article belongs in the East Bank thread -- where it's already been posted, incidentally.

Second, I agree that we demolish way too much, and there are a couple of buildings at Wolstein's site that are worth saving. But the ones in question here are mostly godawful. They are wooden shacks built right on the riverbank, and they aren't historic. They're just sleazy, vacant bars.

I don't think you can isolate the Wolstein project from the Stark project. 

 

I know most of those buildings aren't the greatest, but it seems like demolition is always a foregone conclusion, unless the City holds up a hoop through which to jump.  Blinker's characterization of the structures as "sleazy vacant bars" uses three terms that refer to USES of the structure, and not the buildings themselves.  If they were to be renovated and reused, all three of those terms could change, but the structure, and the character they lend to the neighborhood, would remain the same.  Think about it this way--what if someone went through the WHD in the early 1980s and said, "Tear this all down.  These are just sleazy vacant warehouses."? 

 

If downtown (and the rest of the city) are going to progress, preservation needs to become the norm, not the exception.  Not that every building is worth saving, but not every building is justified in being demolished, either. 

 

 

I agree with you about preservation over all. I do think you are off base in this situation though. 

 

It is not like these are historical structures that are being demolished to be replaced with a Walmart Supercenter. These two projects are major ones that will benefit the City of Cleveland for years to come.

 

In the statement above the word to describe these properties is "shacks", enough said.

 

On a separate note: Make no mistake about it, the property owners will hold out until they can to get the best $$ possible.  This is the one and only reason for the holdouts no matter what they say.

Dan: While I agree that preservation or adaptive reuse should be considered in every development, it is but one consideration.  In the Flats East Bank situation, the debate is pretty straight-forward: preservation of these buildings or public access to the riverfront.  It was not possible to do both, due to the buildings being built right up to the riverfront.  So the City and the developer chose to create a continuous boardwalk along the riverfront rather than to keep the structures that existed.  You can argue that this was a bad decision, but using this example to make a general sweeping statement about the City's preservation policy is both unfair and, sadly, par for the course when it comes to your posts in my opinion.

What historic buildings will we lose with Pesht? I thought it was mostly over parking lots..

Dan, the article you posted was already posted in the "Flats East Bank" thread, and I'd prefer if we keep the discussions separate. There's already dialogue about the pros and cons of demo'ing for the Wolstein plan so folks, please continue the discussion there. I have little choice but to delete the off-topic posts. I apologize if a specific post was deleted, but things need to be tidy around here so let's keep this thread strictly about Stark's proposal.

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=1823.msg148494#new

 

Thanks!

 

 

Fair 'nuff, MayDay.  In my own defense, I couldn't find the East Bank thread....

 

Can anyone access the Crain's article that talks about a timeline on this project? I am not a subscriber. Thanks!

^where is that article? If you give me the partial page, I can post the entire article.

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061218/SUB/61215029/1004&Profile=1004

It looks as though the race is on.  Who can open up first, Stark or Wolstein?  I think it comes down to who can loor Baker H and gaurantee a structure by 2009 when their lease is up.  It is encouraging however to see that Wolstein got approval Friday to knock down buildings in the Flats. 

hmm too bad that article is for subscribers only, anyone have access to it?

Hope I'm allowed to put this here....

 

 

Stark talks timeline on plan for downtown mixed-use site

Linked articles 

Stark’s Woodmere buy invites Eton speculation

 

By STAN BULLARD

 

6:00 am, December 18, 2006

 

The developer of Crocker Park is starting to put a time frame on his grandiose plans for a similar mixed-use project in downtown Cleveland, and it calls for work to start as early as next year.

 

Article Removed

Interesting to hear about the properties east of Jacobs Field. Actually, it's all interesting!

I wonder how long those options are. Very interesting.

The stuff east of Jacob's Field would be much cheaper to develop that the stuff in the Warehouse District.  That is because the price of land and real estate east of Jacobs is about half the cost of land / real estate in the Warehouse District. 

 

I could see the block between Carnegie, Jacob's Field, Playhouse Square and The Wolstein Center becoming something grand.

^If I had a magic wand, I would have put the Avenue District on the parking lots that stretch from Prospect to Carnegie on E.14. That is a prominent entryway into the city and would do a lot to energize Playhouse Square.

Interesting that Stark and Wolstein are both going after Baker.  You would think that Stark would have the advantage given the proximity of his site to the Justice Center and Federal Courthouse and other law firms (seems strange that a law firm would want to locate in the Flats so far away from the central business district and other large law firms and banks).  However Wolstein is obviously much further along with his plans (even given the lawsuit) so he may have an advantage if Baker needs new digs by 2009.  While Stark states he wants to start "something"  in 2007, I find that hard to believe given all the work he probably has to do to get city approvals and just have construction drawings prepared which take quite some time.  I not sure he even has a concrete concept yet (what goes where) let along drawings upon which a contractor can bid the work and start digging and nailing. 

i wonder if zaremba moving thru the theoretical and actually breaking ground with avenue has helped stark bump his gameplan up?

I don't think that Stark has bumped up his gameplan. Last year he was saying that his project could be finished by 2008.  I hope that he lands Baker-Hostetler.  I think that it will help him get his project off the ground more quickly. From what I'm hearing, the Flats project is receiving some very strong interest and will do just fine.  Anyways, BH would serve to be a very strong link between the WHD and Public Square.

i wonder if zaremba moving thru the theoretical and actually breaking ground with avenue has helped stark bump his gameplan up?

 

I think you're right. Between the Avenue, Stonebridge Phase V and even the conversion of the Park Building on PS, more and more projects are moving out of the idea stage into the actual construction phase. Wolstein seems hell bent on getting his project done....I think Stark knows that he needs to stop talking about an 'idea' and start giving people actual dates on some action or he may lose some credibility on Pesht.

i wonder if zaremba moving thru the theoretical and actually breaking ground with avenue has helped stark bump his gameplan up?

 

I think you're right. Between the Avenue, Stonebridge Phase V and even the conversion of the Park Building on PS, more and more projects are moving out of the idea stage into the actual construction phase. Wolstein seems hell bent on getting his project done....I think Stark knows that he needs to stop talking about an 'idea' and start giving people actual dates on some action or he may lose some credibility on Pesht.

 

I disagree.  Why rush it, then get caught in the typical cleveland mentaility of "he promised this and we've got nothing!"  Since there are so many "partners" involved, he has to rally the troupes and with such a visable, high  stakes project, i'd be accurate and on point rather than rush some (potential) timeline out to the media for them to throw it back in his face later.

i wonder if zaremba moving thru the theoretical and actually breaking ground with avenue has helped stark bump his gameplan up?

 

I think you're right. Between the Avenue, Stonebridge Phase V and even the conversion of the Park Building on PS, more and more projects are moving out of the idea stage into the actual construction phase. Wolstein seems hell bent on getting his project done....I think Stark knows that he needs to stop talking about an 'idea' and start giving people actual dates on some action or he may lose some credibility on Pesht.

 

I disagree.  Why rush it, then get caught in the typical cleveland mentaility of "he promised this and we've got nothing!"  Since there are so many "partners" involved, he has to rally the troupes and with such a visable, high  stakes project, i'd be accurate and on point rather than rush some (potential) timeline out to the media for them to throw it back in his face later.

 

How long should everyone wait? 2008? 2009? 2010? 2011? Wolstein is trying to move forward, and other projects are being built. I find setting a few dates...instead of saying "I have an idea and someday I'll build it" would be a nice change of pace. If the media throws it back in his face, so what? He's a grown up, right?

 

Let's face it, there's a LONG history in Cleveland of developers promising the world and putting it on hold forever. I like Stark alot, I'd hate for him to join that group of "coulda', woulda', shoulda'" builders of d'town projects.

How is he to put together a timeline when he doesn't own all the property and not all property owners are on board yet.  I think thats the biggest hurdle.

 

Stonebridge, EB flats, Avenue.  None of those were cut and dry once announced.  There was not annoucement>start date>building right off the back.

 

Hell..we havent even seen a unit or building detail for the EB yet.

How is he to put together a timeline when he doesn't own all the property and not all property owners are on board yet.  I think thats the biggest hurdle.

 

Stonebridge, EB flats, Avenue.  None of those were cut and dry once announced.  There was not annoucement>start date>building right off the back.

 

Hell..we havent even seen a unit or building detail for the EB yet.

 

Well the EB project is heavily tied to the eminent domain issue. We wont get anything concrete until the East Bank ownership mess is straightened out.

 

As for Stark, we've had this "announcement" for quite some time. It's just at what point does thing start seem like a good idea gone south? I'm not saying it's even close to being there yet, and I've got alot of faith in Stark, but every year this idea remains just that --an idea-- people will start to get skeptical about this ever seeing the light of day. I just hope it never gets that far.

How is he to put together a timeline when he doesn't own all the property and not all property owners are on board yet.  I think thats the biggest hurdle.

 

Stonebridge, EB flats, Avenue.  None of those were cut and dry once announced.  There was not annoucement>start date>building right off the back.

 

Hell..we havent even seen a unit or building detail for the EB yet.

 

Well the EB project is heavily tied to the eminent domain issue. We wont get anything concrete until the East Bank ownership mess is straightened out.

 

As for Stark, we've had this "announcement" for quite some time. It's just at what point does thing start seem like a good idea gone south? I'm not saying it's even close to being there yet, and I've got alot of faith in Stark, but every year this idea remains just that --an idea-- people will start to get skeptical about this ever seeing the light of day. I just hope it never gets that far.

 

Every Year???  How many years has this been announced?

 

Dude, I feel your pain, but when was there announced?  How many others have "announced" this plan on this scale?  lets cut dude some slack.  maybe there are confidentiality or other legal agreements in place asking those participating not to comment.

 

there is probably a lot going on behind the scenes than we are not privy to and although from our stand point this project might be moving at a glacial pace..I have faith the powers at large are working diligently

So much of this project has to do with TIF financing, which means a lot of accountants and lawyers from the city, county, port authority and private sector talking to each other. This is a massive, multi-billion-dollar project. And Stark isn't just working on the so-called Power Block in the Warehouse District. He's working on the whole enchilada to have a phased-in building process in place.

 

Then there's the leasing activity, where you have retailer A saying they'll come to the development if retailer B and C are there. But then retail C says they'll come in only if retailer D and E are there. I'm sure the leasing agents are burning the candle at both ends on this project.

 

Let your imaginations run wild as to how much work has been done, is being done and have yet to do. And you might be closer to appreciating what these people are up to.

Fair enough, KJP and MTS. I guess I'm being a little impatient on the project. :)

KJP, have you heard anything concrete about his plans for the Erie St. Cemetery block? Not asking for anything proprietary, confidential ... just interested in whether this is still pretty conceptual or further along. It seems like he has assembled options for a pretty substantial footprint, particularly in the Northeast quadrant of the block. This is AT LEAST as exciting as Pesht. Connector for Playhouse Square and Jacobs, with proximity to CSU, The Avenue and the Financial District = success.

 

And correct me if I'm wrong, but this area was not included in Stark's "I Have a Pesht" talks ... if I recall, he talked about the important connector being the eastern river bank and the bluff behind Terminal Tower, the parking lots on the southeast corner of the Warehouse District and WD extensions north toward Brown Stadium. Interesting to see this land purchase pop up.

^ that has the most exciting all-new residential potential to me. i really dig apts facing over and surrounding cool old cemetaries -- paris and buenos aires hooked me on that.

Actually, this part of Downtown was in Stark's initial "Y Cleveland" vision.  This is the branch of the "Y" that stretches down Prospect and Euclid.  And yes, it is quite exciting to hear about this...though, I'd weigh in that the WHD parking lots are a bit more exciting...if I had to choose!

^I agree. First things first.

KJP, have you heard anything concrete about his plans for the Erie St. Cemetery block?

 

When I read that in Crain's it was the first I'd heard of it. And boy that hurt to admit that! Congrats to Crain's for that scoop.

It can be nice, sometimes, to find out that there's more progress being made than we can keep track of!

 

When I think of a location for a new office building, I think of only one site -- the parking lot on Public Square. No matter how many wonderful downtown projects get built, there will still be a gaping hole in the city's heart with that site remaining as a parking lot. It has to be filled, and a new Sherwin-Williams world headquarters and technology tower would be an ideal candidate for filling it.

 

 

I like your style :-)

Curiosity has the better of me here. What made you zero in on this message of mine from 21 months ago? Do you work for Sherwin Williams' facilities department? Or have some other tap on insider info about that Public Square parking lot? If you do, you can always PM me if you want!

 

BTW, I'd forgotten all about this message string! Seems to be an ideal candidate for combining with the Pesht thread.

^combine or lock?

What made you zero in on this message of mine from 21 months ago? Do you work for Sherwin Williams' facilities department? Or have some other tap on insider info about that Public Square parking lot? If you do, you can always PM me if you want!

 

Sorry to disappoint, but I just stumbled upon the thread and liked the idea.  Sherwin Williams is one of the few area companies that could use a skyscraper (along with Progressive, but that tower never panned out.) 

 

I actually used to be friends with the daughter of Karl Schmidt, who's the Senior Vice President of Marketing, but I don't think that counts for much, and I haven't seen them in years. 

^combine or lock?

 

I was thinking they ought to be combined. This thread shows some of the early stuff of the Pesht project.

Just found this old article, written by Stark himself....

__________________

 

http://retailtrafficmag.com/mag/retail_mixeduse_density_yields/

 

EXPERT ANALYSIS: Mixed-Use Density Yields Urban Excitement

 

By Robert L. Stark

 

Aug 1, 2005 12:00 PM

 

Since the 1950s, suburbia has been enticing people away from cities with the promise of green and uncluttered space. As eager new suburbanites began experiencing their unspoiled lifestyle, they found that they were required to compartmentalize the components of their lives: work, shop, dine and play, In the process, they inadvertently disassembled a wholeness of being that city life offered by providing for all these pursuits as a part of the walkable community to which everyone belonged.

 

...

 

Robert L. Stark is CEO of Stark Enterprises and developer of Crocker Park, a mixed-use project in Westfield, Ohio.

 

Westfield?

did someone fall asleep when clicking "change" on the spell check?

Why? Westfield isn't spelled wrong....for Westfield, Ohio.