Architect Robert Corna surprised that partner Doug Price wants fresh talent for tower

Posted by Steven Litt/Plain Dealer Architecture Critic January 30, 2008 15:03PM

Categories: Architecture

 

Cleveland architect Robert Corna was taken aback today when asked to comment about statements by his development partner, Doug Price III, who said it was "not a foregone conclusion" that Corna would design a new office tower as part of the downtown Ameritrust complex.

 

Speaking Monday, Price said, "we're going to be bringing in people to put several concepts together" for the new offrice tower.

 

He said that Corna, with whom he partnered on the Strongbridge housing development in the Flats, "is a component" of the project, but that "we know we need a top-notch firm and that's what we're going to be looking for."

 

Corna said, "I'm somewhat surprised at that comment. I have to talk to Doug about it."

get over it please... :roll:

 

Let us know when you win the Pritzker...

Crain's

 

Ameritrust buyer seeks $15M loan from county

By STAN BULLARD and JAY MILLER

4:30 am, February 11, 2008

 

Cuyahoga County commissioners are weighing a proposal by K&D Group, the prospective buyer of downtown Cleveland’s Ameritrust complex, to hold a $15 million mortgage on the property for as much as two years.

 

http://crainscleveland.com/article/20080211/FREE/908616653&SearchID=73309782234961

Food for thought: Tucker Ellis & West might be starting a parade of tenants leaving the Huntington Building for the Flats with E&Y likely to follow.  Huntington Bank also is considering leaving the Huntington Building, so the Huntington Building could be left mostly empty.  But with the purchase of the Ameritrust Building by Cuyahoga County, the commissioners showed their interest in being at E9th & Euclid.  The commissioners, now considering the sale of Ameritrust to K&D, still have the need for consolidated office space.  Does it seem plausible that Cuyahoga County will lease all or part of the Huntington Building?  They might be able to get a grand headquarters like they were originally looking for but at a steep discount relative to the cost of redeveloping Ameritrust.  Obviously the county still has several options (EOG @ E9th & Superior, Pesht, May Co Bldg, etc. could work too). 

That's not a bad thought.  Welcome to the site, too.

Not a bad thought at all.  Huntington is massive, has the grandeur you mentioned, has a garage, has the location they wanted all along...  who owns it and how much space could they really put together?  I've got to imagine that it'd be a lot more economical than tearing down a 29-story building and starting from scratch!

^That assumes the county's goal is saving money and not paying off old political favors.  Still can't believe the bad taste the Breuer tower disaster left in my mouth.

 

Seriously though, that could work pretty well if the owner could set aside enough contiguous space and allow the county to have its way with the ground floor.  Not sure how remaining tenants (assuming there are some) would like it though.

I do not think that the county needs to be centralized in the CBD in fact locating it midpoint on the Euclid corridor actually would work best.  The prosecutors are located in the Justice center so they are already close to the county court house.  I am still waiting for someone to present more of a reason for the county to be in a marketable district other than their own psychological ones. 

 

I don't think anyone argued that the County needs to be Downtown, they argued that Downtown benefits from having the County workers.  Do you think Downtown is strong enough to lose a few thousand more employees to another location?

Not really sure what the advantage of having the county in the middle of the Euclid Corridor is either.  Downtown is a natural position for the county because of it's mass transit options from BOTH the west and east side.

Willard park is good spot for the county. Its a useless park, plenty of allready "useable" greenspace nearby. Just leave the few large trees and space for the free stamp, shoehorn the building into the rest of the space, build a new garage on the hill near the tracks. Sell/use/raze old county space as part of a improved convention center.

 

EZ done for the county, but this all about bureaucracy and political favors when it comes to government.

 

Trust site. Hotel loby in the rotunda. Hotel pool in the bottom of the tower for guests and residents of the tower. Lower half of the tower is hotel, condos on the upper half, condo entrance on the tower. Raze off the back half "connctor" between the euclid building and the tower. Perhaps take off some of the building they want to raze for a plaza. Shoehorn an automated parking garage in that space. Fix up the back half of the buildings to concel the garage, make it residential. Raze the buildings on huron, create tiered wedding cake style office building there. Brick up the alley...maybe fix up the CAC building for residential, make it feel a bit more europian.

Sorry folks - just doing a little housekeeping.

KJP....well?  I'm waiting! 8-)

After talking with a K&D Group executive (I cannot name him in writing) earlier this evening, I learned that the Breuer Tower project is going to be an absolutely massive endeavor. And K&D will be moving very quickly on this (and 668 Euclid), with the first plans delivered to the city possibly before summer.

 

As has been reported in this thread earlier, the project isn't limited to the Breuer Tower or even the former Ameritrust structures. The Truman Building and 1010 Euclid would be demolished for an office tower. I asked if there was a tenant in pocket but he could not answer. The CAC Building would be redeveloped by K&D, with a walkways on the upper floors of the buildings connecting them.

 

I'm pleased to see K&D Group moving forward so quickly with this project, which tells me they have tenants already lined up or very close to signing. I'm also pleased with the scale (we didn't get a chance to discuss what K&D has in mind for the 9th Street side near Prospect/Huron). However, I'm sorry to see the 1010 Euclid building go. I think it has a classic, simple beauty and would make a great loft apartment building. I can't picture the Truman Building -- anyone got a picture??

I can't picture the Truman Building -- anyone got a picture??

 

Grubb and Ellis:

 

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/LoopLink/Profile/Profile.aspx?LL=true&LID=15469563&STID=grubb

Thanks. Yep, that one is expendable.

Actually it would be a great building if restored.  It has very nice detailing.  What is going to happen to the smaller building between the Truman Building and the CAC?  I am assuming that would be demolished as part of the project as well.  Unless the plan is to have a skywalk over it from the new building to the CAC.

What happened to Eli Mann owning the CAC building and redeveloping it as part of his project?

Who owns the rights to the CAC name and logo? The " Phoenix Committee" is being led by the former club president so presumably they control the name and logo; it was a member owned club. I'm just curious because I doubt that if K&D/Mann wanted to re-open the club that the ex-members would stand in their way.

 

What happened to Eli Mann owning the CAC building and redeveloping it as part of his project?

 

I wasn't in a position to write down what was said as it was being said, but I seem to recall that K&D would buy the CAC building. Yet I read in the CAC thread (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,11817.0.html) that Eli Mann bought the building. So now I don't know if my memory is playing tricks on me.

^Totally understand the difficulty in capturing all the details. 

 

I'm confused because I thought Eli Mann owned the building and already received a state historic tax credit to rehab it.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7408.msg236369.html#msg236369

I am also very aware of the details of the K&D project and am much less optimistic about the quickness of the deal.  I belive it has been noted publicly (at least I hope it has been) that it is unlikely that anything will happen with the Breuer tower for at least 2 years.  The contract is still not finalized between the county and K&D. 

 

The county jumped the gun on trying to save face by going to the media with the so called "contract".  There has been some press in the PD concerning that the $35million offer wasn't really $35million.  The contract stipulates that the county must finish all asbestos removal and provide a sort of $15million loan to K&D (less then $20million net to the county).  All in all, if K&D can't get financing and can't get tenants, they don't have to buy the building - the contract was more of an "option to buy". 

 

This is a very speculative deal.  I hope something does get done with that corner though.

 

I think you are going to see movement on the 668 project and nothing with the Breuer for quite some time.

This is just one piece of the pie, but ...  I understand that loaning $15 million to the purchaser of your building is nothing to sneeze at, but it can also be a decent investment for the County if it's not a subsidized loan, but is more along the lines of a market rate loan.  Not only do they sell the building, but they can recoup the loan payments + interest for years.  If I'm off on this, please correct me!

 

As for the 1010 and Truman buildings...  I think both are fetching and ideal in size and scale for Euclid Ave.  In fact, I like the Truman building more than 1010... there's more detail to the facade.  Either way, they'd both make good rehabs, but I'm not the one trying to place tenants and make the numbers work!

 

One note from the link Confiteordeo posted above... the listing says occupancy is 100%... wha???

^I noticed that too.

Maybe there's some secret federal transportation program being test deep within the bowls of the building.

 

or not

Holy crap.  Here we go again.

 

Cuyahoga County commissioners nix Ameritrust property deal

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/02/cuyahoga_county_commissioners.html

I can't believe these idiots are in office.  At least this cannot be blamed on the citizens of Cleveland, the entire county must take blame for electing two incompetent commissioners.  I'd like to hear the other two commissioners opinions on this matter.

Wow. What did the commissioners want from K&D? The article doesn't explain.

the last sentence is also scary.

 

Do we know how much of that figure it attributed to asbestos abatement?

We have to get these two dummies out of office.  I agree... that last sentence is scary.  "County commissioners had approved $63 million in contracts to build the new building. But officials say only $35.5 million has been spent."  Spent on what, exactly?  They only wanted to spend $63 on the new building, on what could be considered Cleveland's most important intersection?  I know that isn't new, I just forgot that they wanted to put up a piece of crap in the Ameritrust's place.  I wonder if K&D will bid again on the project?  I guess we'll have to see...

Unreal.  Does anyone think that K&D might come back with a new offer, or has the county just destroyed the only prospect that they had? 

as i eluded to earlier - you can't blame this on the County necessarily.  It was the County's fault and eagerness to "save face" that they announced the deal to the media prior to actually reading the contract. 

 

The offer K&D put forth was not for $35MM as I stated earlier - it wasn't even a true contract - it was an "option to buy" with the county having to pay roughly an additional $20MM upfront with $15MM of that as deferred repayment.

 

This announcement got a lot of hopes up - but not accepting the offer was the best decision for the county. 

^ Did they think about all of this when they bought the building?  This is really a mess. 

 

I would much rather prefer providing a $15 million loan with a portion of it forgivable than to risk taking an even larger loss on this project.

 

Do you think that something could be up the commissioners' sleeves?  Maybe they didn't have confidence in K&D to get the project done?  Maybe they declined the option because one of the big guys in town has come forward with another proposal?  And why wouldn't the county still move forward leasing the building for its offices from a private owner, which would seemingly be attractive bait? 

 

Something seems fishy here.

 

ok, I'm hearing that this is just a formality. The County is going to re-issue an rfp that will be tailor-made to K & D's plan. The reason being is that K & D's original bid did not comply with the original rfp and therefore the County could not legally accept it. It is just a matter of time...

ok, I'm hearing that this is just a formality. The County is going to re-issue an rfp that will be tailor-made to K & D's plan. The reason being is that K & D's original bid did not comply with the original rfp and therefore the County could not legally accept it. It is just a matter of time...

 

Man I hope you're right!

ok, I'm hearing that this is just a formality. The County is going to re-issue an rfp that will be tailor-made to K & D's plan. The reason being is that K & D's original bid did not comply with the original rfp and therefore the County could not legally accept it. It is just a matter of time...

 

Man I hope you're right!

 

I'm not 100% sure with the details though, but I've got the gist of it.

ok, I'm hearing that this is just a formality. The County is going to re-issue an rfp that will be tailor-made to K & D's plan. The reason being is that K & D's original bid did not comply with the original rfp and therefore the County could not legally accept it. It is just a matter of time...

 

I didnt even think of this, but this is very true, we do this all the time in the Fed. Govt.  You cant accept a variation of what the RFP was asking for, it makes for an unfair situation or creates an uneven playing field.  This wouldnt be fair to the others who may have considered submitting proposals but may not have due to the language in the original RFP (rules that discluded them).  Since nobody else bid on the original, they can rewrite the RFP catering to this "1" proposal, of course this would also open the door for others to submit similar proposals (which isnt neccesarily bad), unless they "wire" it for KandD (make so specific that only KandD would qualify or apply), but in a situation like this they would have to be careful, as you could see how this could result in (or at least look like) "favors", and I dont think the commissioners can afford to have any more controversy here. 

I just hope Hagan doesnt have any relatives at KandD, or outstanding political contributions that would draw any suspicion.  You get the idea.       

the RFP isn't being redone to allow for K&D to resumbit a plan - that reasoning is being given to hush the critics.  Don't get your hopes up that a new bid will be put together for this project.

Here is the article.

 

Cuyahoga County commissioners nix Ameritrust property deal

Posted by Joe Guillen February 22, 2008 17:57PM

 

Cuyahoga County next week will reject a private developer's offer to buy the downtown Ameritrust property, jeopardizing a grand vision for a $200 million complex of hotel rooms, residences, new office space and retail stores.

 

County commissioners will re-open bidding for the property, but their $35-million asking price for the buildings at East Ninth Street and Euclid Avenue will not be reduced.

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/02/cuyahoga_county_commissioners.html

 

 

And now that I've posted it, WTF? 3231, I heard the same thing as you yesterday but I thought that issue was more about other terms of the bid and not the loan. If the county has rejected K&D's request for a loan, I can't see why K&D would bid again, revised RFP or not. They seem to need that loan to make the numbers pencil.

Who knows, I could be wrong though. Regardless, the level of ineptitude shown by our commissioners is truly staggering.

blinker - exactly!

So, is the county confident that they could find another buyer? Is Ferchill preparing a stronger bid? There are a lot of unanswered questions here. The County must feel pretty confident that someone will take the complex off of their hands or else they wouldn't have rejected K & D.

So, is the county confident that they could find another buyer? Is Ferchill preparing a stronger bid? There are a lot of unanswered questions here. The County must feel pretty confident that someone will take the complex off of their hands or else they wouldn't have rejected K & D.

 

I really wish that I could believe this, but I have zero confidence in the county.  No matter how much we speculate, there is no way that we could ever know what those idiots are thinking.  They even say at the end of the article that they are willing to go ahead with their previous plan and demolish it if they don't get a bid that they like. 

Q: is the $35M asking price a fair appraisal of this property or, as the article suggests, the figure settled upon to merely bail Hagan out of his/his comish cronies own incompetence in spending (see: wasting) the same amount on the ill-thought, failed destruction of the handsome Breuer? (esp given the fact that, if these fools had done what they’d set out to do: build a nice, unified downtown-enhancing new home for the county, in the 1st place, they’d be about ready to move in by now) -- seems to be what Timmy, himself, is saying if the $35M asking price a so-called "if come" rather than reality -- can he friggin' legally do that esp after he's seemingly contractually bound by K&D who answered the bid, be they the sole bidder or not???? ... I guess it's one thing if a private seller did this -- its a free country and free market economy -- but can the county, essentially, ask a private buyer to subsidize the incompetence of public officials?   Maybe so, but something seems a bit off kilter here.

 

And now Hagan's hinting at the $15M K&D is asking to finance this deal, from the very same county, no less, for this property which very well may not be properly appraised, is somehow a violation (of Fed, State or local) RFP standards?

 

Like I said, something smells real bad here, w/ serious legal implications.

 

leave it up to the county to screw things up agian :)

I'm surprised that Sam Miller hasn't said, "How 'bout I buy the building, retrofit it for your offices, then lease it back to you for 50 years?"  Seemingly, the county's plans would be fulfilled, and a developer can make a mint off of guaranteed rent for an extended period of time.  Maybe that conversation has taken place and we don't know about it. 

 

Don't forget that rent is one of those kickbacks that politicians can offer to developers and building owners that support them.

From what i understand - if the county does not get a bid for at least $35MM of real upfront money - they will proceed with their construction plans for the building.  Probably will sit vacant for quite some time though before anything happens with it

I think at this point I want some real solid info from a reliable source.  The accusations and name calling are getting annoying.

I think at this point I want some real solid info from a reliable source.

 

Don't we all.

 

But I think the commissioners have already showed what clowns they are, no matter how exactly this turns out.  Not a baseless accusation, just an inescapable conclusion drawn from the path that got us to this position at all.

Personally, this doesn't strike me as bad per se. I personally happier to see K&D invest $20 million directly than to see the county raze the building. But if we're going to allow K&D to make a bid that doesn't conform to the original intent of the RFP, then as a matter of fairness and transparency, other developers should be afforded the chance to weigh in with the amended criteria. Whether the county will lower the requirements of the new RFP OR if any other developers would be interested in submitting with a $20 million investment OR if those development proposals would all preserve the existing building OR if the Commissioners would favor saving the building, all other things being equal ... well, those are unanswered questions, at least for me. But in terms of fairness, this strikes me as reasonable ... it would be unfair to award the contract to K&D when other developers might have been interested in the site if offered a $15 million loan.

^Excellent breakdown of a complex situation.  Hopefully you're right.

If this really is merely a formality to allow K&D's bid to meet the requirements of the rfp, then OK by me.

 

What I really don't want to happen is for the commissioners' newfound fiscal responsibility to tank any interest in private redevelopment.  If the commissioners were really interested in saving the county money, they never would have chosen this money pit as the site for the project.  But if they were honest about their stated intent to "enliven" Euclid, they should be willing to work with K&D on some creative financing instead of throwing good money after bad and continuing on making this the new county admin center (someday).