if there was no law, permits required, some people would tear down everything and make it parking.

 

That's ridiculous.  For parking to be profitable, there has to be a demand for it.  If everything was torn down, it'd be about as useful as building a parking lot in the middle of a cornfield.

 

Of course parking lots are profitable, but only if there is a high demand and low supply of parking.  If more people lived downtown and public transit use increased, the demand for parking would be lowered.  Couple that with garages in the new developments and a higher demand for space to build and all of a sudden the relative value of these surface lots is diminished.  Hopefully, this is the route downtown will take in the future.

I agree with the idea that this is all about economics. I've always loved the idea of Pesht, but there are scarce resources and dueling developers at play here. I think those parking lots will one day not be parking lots. If that was Manhattan, we all know they'd be gobbled up in a millisecond. I think once we can get our other ducks in a row in terms of creating a dynamic growing regional economy, these types of things will work themselves out because demand will increase.

 

If this would have been six months ago, I would have been freaked but now that we can see a tiny pin-prick of light at the end of the ECP tunnel, and Euclid looks like it might finally get its revitalization, I'm more at ease and am hopefully we can breath some life into this great street. If we can grow a vibrant Euclid, I'd be OK with the WHD parking lots staying like that for a while, and I think that would probably ultimately help create demand for new stuff on top of them as a transition between the WHD and the rest of downtown.

 

edit: Obviously, I'd like for everything to happen at once, but I'm not so convinced that a "big bang" development around here is the wisest move. It took God seven days and Rome wasn't built in...well, you know.

^I kind of feel the same way.  Getting Euclid back on track will hopefully be huge in terms of building more steam for downtown as a whole.

 

One other observation that may or may not matter: I'd bet good money that moving E&Y and Eaton to new buildings on Superior as part of Pesht will result in a lot more transit riders than moving them to FEB.  With the Red Line carrying the lions share of rapid riders into downtown, I just don't see WFL appealing to so many folks, even with a new office building in the loop.  Maybe down the line, but I'd think train frequency would have to be boosted a ton to get people to transfer lines on a daily basis.

 

 

Last I checked, the name of the game in business is to make money, which usually starts with putting a lid on costs. If Wolstein is offering a better deal than Stark, Wolstein wins.

 

you're right......i was gonna say wolstein prolly offered them a bigger cut

 

i agree completely with everything oengus said and this pretty much sums up everything

 

It is and it always has been all about money. 

 

 

stark talks a big game for someone who's only done cracker park. he first says "im tired of the suburbs" then starts talkin about a "downtown" for solon. seems like if he cant get his chunk of the pie (i.e. all of the big players lookin for new office space) then he wont do it. its all or nothing. i like his big vision and we need more people to think that way in this town but how many projects have we seen proposed and never happened here? i'll believe it when there are cranes in the air. stark acquiring those lots already cancelled a couple smaller projects that were going to go up.

 

 

Very true, KJP.  It think we all know (with the possible exception of oengus1963) that those aren't going to be parking lots forever.  That's prime real estate, and there is no doubt that they will eventually be developed as Cleveland draws more businesses to Downtown.  I just was kind of hoping that it would be sooner rather than later. 

 

those parking lots will still be there in 10 yrs i bet in which time cleveland will just be one big suburb with a couple nice skyscrapers downtown

 

Once businesses grow, then the city will grow

 

you mean the outer suburbs will

 

 

.

.

those parking lots will still be there in 10 yrs i bet in which time cleveland will just be one big suburb with a couple nice skyscrapers downtown

 

A little overly pessimistic, don't you think?

 

Once businesses grow, then the city will grow

 

you mean the outer suburbs will

 

Downtown has been growing at a faster rate than the suburbs as of late.  What makes you think, with the recent popularization of New Urbanism and exploding gas prices, that this trend won't continue?

The one thing that FEB has going for itself is that the Waterfront Line runs through it.  Maybe RTA increase the frequency of trains coming through.  That way if people want to get lunch at Tower City, they take the short ride. 

 

Also, if Stark struggles to land tenants, maybe he could investigate only developing portions of the project up to a certain floor.  Fill in every parking lot with some portion of retail, parking, office etc.  Design the buildings structurally to enable future floors to be constructed for residential, office whatever... a la 515 Euclid.  That's easier said than done but why not look at from that angle.

 

 

It seems to me that E&Y is courting FEB in order to drive down lease rates from Stark, mainly because it really doesn't make much sense for an accounting firm to move farther away from its clients.  They still are heavily reliant on face-to-face transactions, and even with the use of the Waterfront Line, they would still be relatively far from the E. 9th business district (unless the trolleys begin serving FEB).

 

I just can't see them seriously considering moving to FEB.

It seems to me that E&Y is courting FEB in order to drive down lease rates from Stark.......

 

Interesting, that never crossed my mind.

That's not true.  E&Y will either stay put or go to FEB.  They could not move to Stark's project because Stark could not have their building up before E&Y's current lease expires.  Wolstein is much further along than Stark w/financing & tenanting and has the ability to have E&Y's building up in two years.

Why is this such a big hinderance for Stark, though? Are there not enough other office tenants to fill what he wants to do?

Probably not for what he wants to do.  Eaton was the biggest and I think E and Y was the secont biggest.  There are some others in play, but thats not to say that they were all going to move to new space.  I think its more of a necessary component to Starks plan, but apparently has also become a more important component with Wolsteins..  Heres hoping that Stark can lure somebody in from the suburbs, or out of town! 

While I'd prefer to see a firm lured from the suburbs or out of town, don't forget there are another six large office tenants looking for space downtown. Just because Eaton and E&Y may be going to the Flats, doesn't mean the world has ended for Stark, or the Warehouse District. Squires Sanders & Dempsey's lease doesn't end until 2011 or 2012....

Man, i love the cleveland "sky is falling" mentality.  Bob Stark throws one mini tantrum, spouts out about two sentences and already everyone is convinced that not only is pesht dead, but that the warehouse district will never get developed, and FEB all of the sudden is considered siberia and nothing more than crocker park and is the center of all evil.  Take a deep breath, breathe, and let's wait for a little more information before having a collective development anneurism.

Listen here, McCleveland - you can take your "can't do" attitude somewhere else. ;-) People who really care about this stuff prove it by ranting and raving and complaining!!! ;-) Don't even dare suggest that people have a little patience, and don't EVEN CONTEMPLATE suggesting that people have a little more information and familiarity about the project or real estate and development before they go on their rant!!! ;-) If you're suggesting people look at things objectively, then you obviously want to turn downtown into Brunstucky and you don't care about this city!!! ;-)

Listen here, McCleveland - you can take your "can't do" attitude somewhere else. ;-) People who really care about this stuff prove it by ranting and raving and complaining!!! ;-) Don't even dare suggest that people have a little patience, and don't EVEN CONTEMPLATE suggesting that people have a little more information and familiarity about the project or real estate and development before they go on their rant!!! ;-) If you're suggesting people look at things objectively, then you obviously want to turn downtown into Brunstucky and you don't care about this city!!! ;-)

 

Totally agree. Why doesn't he just change his name to McCleveland.com already?!  ;)

I thought we banned the mention of Br*nstucky on this forum?!  :wink:

for some reason within the last week there has been an awful lot of cleveland.com here. :lol: Seems to me we are hitting the dead of winter lack of development lockdown... which is exactly why i am jumping on a boat to float around in the caribbean for a week.

Don't leave out that this only happens in Cleveland, McCleveland! Post of the week! :laugh:

Listen here, McCleveland - you can take your "can't do" attitude somewhere else. ;-) People who really care about this stuff prove it by ranting and raving and complaining!!! ;-) Don't even dare suggest that people have a little patience, and don't EVEN CONTEMPLATE suggesting that people have a little more information and familiarity about the project or real estate and development before they go on their rant!!! ;-) If you're suggesting people look at things objectively, then you obviously want to turn downtown into Brunstucky and you don't care about this city!!! ;-)

 

Or, in simpler terms:  "Think first. Then write." - Sir KJP

wink overload

 

Once businesses grow, then the city will grow

 

you mean the outer suburbs will

 

Downtown has been growing at a faster rate than the suburbs as of late.  What makes you think, with the recent popularization of New Urbanism and exploding gas prices, that this trend won't continue?

 

I think this is the whole point.  Building one will help the other, regardless of which order it is completed.  Build out in suburbia (where you basically cut off half of your eligible employment population) or start anew in WHD or FEB?  Once one of them is there and gaining momentum, the other is only going to benefit from being that close in proximity to more retail/residential/office. 

 

Should FEB be first, doesn't that make the WHD plan that much more appealing?  And vice versa?

I think a positive that we may be overlooking is that the Flats isn't too heavy on the retail side, it's more restaurants and entertainment from what I understand.  If that's true, with the new residents and visitors that will move into and patronize FEB (500-600 new units), a demand for more retail would naturally occur and maybe that's when the retail side of Pesht becomes feasible without a major office tenant.

Should FEB be first, doesn't that make the WHD plan that much more appealing?  And vice versa?

 

I completely agree.  I think those who think otherwise are viewing the plans under the usual Clevelander pessimism microscope.

Man, i love the cleveland "sky is falling" mentality.  Bob Stark throws one mini tantrum, spouts out about two sentences and already everyone is convinced that not only is pesht dead, but that the warehouse district will never get developed, and FEB all of the sudden is considered siberia and nothing more than crocker park and is the center of all evil.  Take a deep breath, breathe, and let's wait for a little more information before having a collective development anneurism.

 

THANK YOU!

 

Or, in simpler terms:  "Think first. Then write." - Sir KJP

 

 

THANK YOU!

 

 

Correct me if I am wrong…but I do not think Starks own the lots.

 

He requires enough commitments in prospective, to acquire the land.  That’s the whole argument, Wolstein can take 400,000 sq ft…but is Eaton and E&Y over that? 

 

I would say no to Wolstein’s request to build over 400,000 sq ft,  if I was the city planner.

 

But Starks requires what 1.5M sq ft?  I do not believe the sum of all prospects equate to that, correct me if  I am wrong.     

 

We do not know who is winning in pricing, it is related to who has more real costs.  My guess would be Wolstein, I am sure that the owners of those lots on superior are asking an outrageous price.

 

That is why I look for a solution, the value of the lots to the owners is the revenue, the stream of capital daily. what is it?  That is the value of the land to the owners…what does it net?  If they sell them the stream stops, if one lot nets a million a year then that’s a good return…why sell it? 

 

But Starks must have that figured out…but he is struggling to get enough tenants to commit, but if his costs were not so high he could go after other prospects. 

 

I still think the same thing, build a garage in the corner with county money, a high tech robotic garage.  Use the opportunities at hand to get control of parking in the city, make it a regulated commodity. 

 

But to go further the cost of those robotic garages need to be kept low as possible, the lowest possible costs.  The revenue stream used to pay existing parking rights of the lots owners and also to finance the costs of the facilities.  

 

I cannot build a garage without the city’s ok, but the city can build one without delay.  But they will not trample the revenue streams of those that already own parking. 

 

1) I would contact robotic garage manufacturers.  I would ask them for pricing and also ask if they are interested in having local offices and manufacturing…with incentives. 

2) Then trace a low cost supply chain for them, offering incentives. 

3) Seek financing from banks, the state, the fed…a transportation project. 

 

The goal is to be the premier provider of robotic garages and the site would have them integrated throughout.  The required parking space is reduced by 2/3 since the garages require 1/3 the space of tradtional garages.    The revenue from the garages, pays back the dept, it pays a revenue stream to the previous owners, that stream could be limited to 20 years, 30 years….99 years. 

 

If the site now has 1000 spaces…which It may, then the eventual development may have 3000 and serve the entire area?   They would be all owned by the county, better yet RTA or a joint venture, do not assume cars are going away, they may just get smaller and more fuel efficient. 

 

With a growth in residency in the city, the parking issue will not go away it will compound, do not assume people will give up cars, these 250K residences will have cars, they are not moving to get rid of the cars…they may use them less, but they will still have one. 

 

E&Y has 1200 employees, were do they park?  even if only 1000 drive that’s $8,000.00 a day for parking, that $160,000.00 a month. 

 

Government should control parking, it should regulate it like a commodity…

 

Look at it today....it is preventing development. 

 

They could raise parking and lower public transportation costs, build the parking in nodes around the city, linked with transportation. 

 

If they did it correct…in the future people would say wow your city is really well developed and it is odd how little cars you see?         

 

 

I think this is a really interesting post Oengus.. and regardless of how ridiculously off topic it is, i commend you on your thought. If the gov't had enough extra cash flow (it doesn't) then they could build enough garages to put the surface parking profits down and force them to build. This would work, but if you are going to have a car downtown, do you want the gov't to be able to raise and lower the parking rates? i dont know if i would want that much control because sooner or later they would have a monopoly over the city parking!

 

I thought it is a cool idea though for sure.

 

Anways i think the notion that E & Y agreed to wolstein just to lower starks rates is a dirty move, especially because they would really be screwing over the wolstein project. I hope that it goes through especially because a happy flats will create a happy WHD. No matter if E & Y goes there, there are many more tenants around and if businesses thrive more will be successful in the future.

 

Good luck to both developments.. why isn't this stuff being discussed in the FEB thread?

I think this is a really interesting post Oengus.. and regardless of how ridiculously off topic it is, i commend you on your thought. If the gov't had enough extra cash flow (it doesn't) then they could build enough garages to put the surface parking profits down and force them to build. 

 

This idea was written about in a PD article about two or so years ago. The City and County are well aware of the strategy.

It's actually not that far off-topic. And there is money to build parking decks by bonding the projected future parking revenues from the deck. However, to make it work in devaluing the other surface parking lots, you'd have to charge a rate low enough to undercut them. Sounds horribly anti-competitive and anti-free market, but New York City did something very similar to take the subways out of the hands of the corporate interests -- the city built its own competing subways and charged lower fares so that the other subway operators had to sell out or lose their financial shirts.

 

Of course, how could Cleveland afford to build a parking deck if it's charging below-market parking rates? If Cleveland Clinic can get $8 million in federal Department of Transportation funds to build a parking deck for its campus, then why not the city of Cleveland? There may be other ways of slaying the parking lot dragon that's eaten up 60 acres of downtown. But the point is there are ways of doing it. We still need the will, however.

by "the gov't" i meant our local gov't. ODOT gets way too much money, we already know that. I guess some of those funds could be tapped into? I think it definitely sounds like a great idea, as long as the prices for parking stay competitive, then again they have to or a private business will charge less.

 

well, hell, why DONT we do that?

 

gov't coordination? no money? maybe what worked in NYC just wont work here? different city, different solutions.

 

in other words, if this is a proven strategy, what are the negatives? whats holding us back?

A little modification for KJP's mantra: "Think first. Then write. Then re-read what you've written and ask yourself why your posts come across as incoherent diatribes".

:wtf:

 

 

I've got to meet this oengus1963 one of these days. I want to see if you talk the same way you write. Come to one of MayDay's walking tours in the spring, OK?

 

And, BTW oengus1963, I've posted numerous times that Stark doesn't own the parking lots in the WHD. I'm sure that you can find in those postings who does own the parking lots on which Starks intends to build.

A little modification for KJP's mantra: "Think first. Then write. Then re-read what you've written and ask yourself why your posts come across as incoherent diatribes".

:wtf:

 

And that's why we have the trusty "IGNORE" button.

Any updates?

^No.

 

^^Admins and Mods have to view ALL the threads to ensure they adhere to basic forum decorum and guidelines. Believe me, there have been times where I wished it was an option!

Well, I guess here's an update -  nothing really new to add.

 

"Thank you for your inquiry about our Warehouse District project. Your inquiry is understandable given the recent press about downtown and the Flats project. We are still working on our project and are still hopeful of getting it off the ground. Obviously that can change as circumstances change but we haven’t given up yet! Our timeframe continues to be a 2011 opening which would mean we would expect to start construction by the end of 2009 or start of 2010. I hope that helps with your planning and if I can be of any help please feel free to contact me directly. "

^ even tho i'm sure none of us are pleased with that timeline, nor that worrisome bet-cadging "...hopeful of getting it off the ground" talk, it was an otherwise a nicely worded, rational response.

I think it was more or less the timeline they've always stuck to.

One of Starks associates hangs out at the barking spider on the third thursday of the month.I have talk to her about her job at Starks company,very interesting stuff.

With all due respect, what is your native language?

What kind of stuff was she saying?

OH NO!!! Edsiou is back!

 

Thank GOD I'm leaving for England tomorrow and won't be back for 11 days!!!

 

(But I will be checking in occasionally -- just not as often as I usually do.)

I'm jealous. :(

OH NO!!! Edsiou is back!

 

Thank GOD I'm leaving for England tomorrow and won't be back for 11 days!!!

 

(But I will be checking in occasionally -- just not as often as I usually do.)

 

Stop by Harvey Nic's!!!  Embrace it!  Feel it!  Love it!!

Where is Harvey Nics? Is it in London?

 

Thanks jpop! I can't afford this trip, but I also can't afford to turn down a free flight -- a family member let me have their free miles.

 

Back to Pesht....

Here's why I think Pesht - or other mega-projects that will cover those empty lots in the Warehouse district - will be built: the gas right now is incredibly cheap.  It should be at least $6/gallon, and over the next 2-3 years should go above $10/gallon.  That's b/c China and India are reaching the tipping point where hundreds of millions of people will be able to suddenly buy a car.  Gas consumption will skyrocket, and so will gas prices.

 

Therefore people will start crowding together to save on transportation costs, and so will do businesses.  Employees will want to be closer to work; providers, closer to clients.  There will be a construction boom in every downtown where there's still room to build - and Cleveland has a lot of room left.  Public transportation will become a top choice; the downtowns will become busy and dense.  Trains will get en vogue again: cheaper than trucks to transport goods, and cheaper than airplanes to transport people.  In Europe the price of gas has almost always been pretty much double what's here; the downtowns are also a lot denser.  My two cents: soon, those empty parking lots downtown Cleveland will become very hot pieces of real estate.  So will those abandoned empty buildings & lots down in the Flats.

 

On the downside: imagine an empty, decrepit Westlake or Solon, with abandoned, boarded McMansions ...

On the downside: imagine an empty, decrepit Westlake or Solon, with abandoned, boarded McMansions ...

 

Shucks...

you are very right alanr... energy consumption is going to be a huge problem to tackle.. as its estimated that in the next decade china is going to need as much energy (various forms, however oil is a definite) as the united states.. and china has been spending a lot on military lately... anyways yeah i hope your right on that one and we get bustling, dense downtowns across america!

 

(instead of, you know, nuclear war and the end of earth..  :shoot: :shoot: :evil: :shoot: :shoot:)

:angel:

 

 

kk sorry back on topic..

 

Therefore people will start crowding together to save on transportation costs, and so will do businesses.  Employees will want to be closer to work; providers, closer to clients.  There will be a construction boom in every downtown where there's still room to build - and Cleveland has a lot of room left.  Public transportation will become a top choice; the downtowns will become busy and dense.  Trains will get en vogue again: cheaper than trucks to transport goods, and cheaper than airplanes to transport people.  In Europe the price of gas has almost always been pretty much double what's here; the downtowns are also a lot denser.  My two cents: soon, those empty parking lots downtown Cleveland will become very hot pieces of real estate.  So will those abandoned empty buildings & lots down in the Flats.

 

Did I just witness an Urban Ohio wet dream?

 

EDIT: I hope you're right and we all can have them too!

Does the Med Mart/Convention center deal improve Peszt's chance of becoming a reality?