Jump to content

StapHanger

Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • Content Count

    8,909
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

107 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. ^Just imagine the sight if that intersection weren't such an auto-dominated hellscape!
  2. I don't know if Jacobs has anything real cooking on the West Bank or not (I hope note, because I don't like their vision), but I'm fairly certain the docs recorded in May and $35M in new notes are a red herring. It's secured corporate debt for the parent company, Jacobs Entertainment, Inc., and looks like that $35M is ticketed to payoff other debt, to buy truck stops in Louisiana, and for casino business in Reno and Black Hawk, CO. Here's a summary from Moody's: https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-rates-Jacobs-2nd-Lien-notes-tack-on-B2-affirms--PR_394535 And Wilmington Trust isn't a lender here, just the collateral agent for the note holders.
  3. Very surprising to see a developer provide such a risky guaranty from out-of-deal assets, but I hope it's true! Great sleuthing work.
  4. This would be shocking if true. I cannot imagine a commercial lender making a construction loan in this market without presales, or some non-condo portion that would be sufficient to repay the commercial lender of the construction financing.
  5. ^keeping this on topic and focusing just on this segment of Superior, there is plenty of room for bus lanes (which need to stay, because they were established as part of a federally funded "transit zone"), the bike midway, and car travel lanes. The paved right-of-way is enormous and traffic is overall fairly light.
  6. Based on some Twitter traffic a few weeks ago, I believe the Midway pilot is mostly funded, but not schedule to actually break ground for a year or two.
  7. Vertical condos seem to be almost impossible to develop in CLE for various reasons, but yeah, it is sort of surprising the cheap midrise developers weren't interested. I don't really have any complaints about the the townhouses, though. They are a product that does well in Cleveland and probably good to diversify the types of stakeholders downtown.
  8. I don't understand why you all have such a low opinion of the housing market in Tremont and Ohio City. The sales prices for new construction are extremely healthy. The sales prices for existing houses now paying full taxes are healthy. The market isn't going to tank if the abatements for new construction in these areas (and only these areas) are phased out. And the wave of new construction is more like 25 years old, not 4 years old (I was slightly involved in the early 1990s).
  9. ^I think it's bad policy for the school district and city to be writing checks to those homebuyers so they outbid someone willing to buy a slightly less fancy house on that same lot. That's one economic effect of the abatement policy. At this point, though, I'd guess most of the benefit is going to the owner of the vacant lot, so it's the school district and city are writing checks to land speculators. I have nothing against using tax breaks to move the needle on development when it's required for something good to pencil out, but that's no longer the case in Tremont and Ohio City for single family houses and townhouses. The high cost of vacant land is solid evidence of this.
  10. It is absolutely time to pull back on tax abatement in Tremont and Ohio City, at least for single family housing (attached or detached). At this point, the policy is only juicing land prices there or encouraging especially large/expensive houses.
  11. Cleveland, where the public finances the hotels and private citizens have to finance the playgrounds. What a wonderfully functional place.
  12. ^How much confidence do you have that the WFL loop would increase property values enough to generate significant revenue from a TIF? Can't say I have much. And new development wouldn't add to it, because we don't make new development pay [non-school] property taxes round these parts. We already give the tax increment to the developer.
  13. Can't make out (or remember) the name, but you can see it in this view: https://bit.ly/2YGYNQY
  14. Will be interesting and probably disappointing seeing how the eventual developer provides parking for the site. Hopefully we see the current surface lot developed, but seems likely it just stays parking. I'm still annoyed that MRN demolished a bar on Lorain Avenue to provide more parking for the United Bank Building.
×
×
  • Create New...