Jump to content
KJP

Cleveland: Ohio City: Market Square / Harbor Bay development

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

I agree that would be better off if Cuyahoga county was one government instead 59 cities, villages, towns, and townships. I don’t understand the connection between Ohio Home Rule and Ohio Balkanization. Are you suggesting that without home rule we wouldn’t have this silly Balkanization? How so? Or are you saying that without home rule, the Balkanization would be irrelevant?  I think we mostly agree on this, I’m just trying to understand the connection you’re making. 

 

Mostly the latter—that we could overcome Balkanization without the power cities have in Ohio. California also has home rule, but there is a certain level of checks and balances the state and county can exert to keep the local empires from killing each other. Our fiefdoms have no power steering them in the same direction and spend most of their time in civil war. 

 

But also, doesn’t the way our home rule laws are written in the constitution impact the logistics of a city merger? And city-county merger, since our counties basically have no real structure one the land inside them is incorporated?

 

Maybe in misremembering, it’s been 7 years since I was researching this stuff in grad school. This is quickly moving off topic, I assume there’s a better place for this convo?

 

* edited typo in “Maybe”

Edited by Clevecane
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the developer basically wanted a tax abatement that was never given to any developement in prior history?

 

I get the risk the developer is making, and sometimes you want to give developers additional flexibility because of the results (new residents, office workers, new tax income) that new development will bring to the city...

 

That said, it sort of angers me when developers want to push the envelope with smaller cities and get their ransom, but wouldn't dare ask for such high financial requests to develop in NYC/Toronto/Chicago, etc. 

Edited by troeros

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, troeros said:

So the developer basically wanted a tax abatement that was never given to any developement in prior history?

 

I get the risk the developer is making, and sometimes you want to give developers additional flexibility because of the results (new residents, office workers, new tax income) that new development will bring to the city...

 

That said, it sort of angers me when developers want to push the envelope with smaller cities and get their ransom, but wouldn't dare ask for such high financial requests to develop in NYC/Toronto/Chicago, etc. 

 

Seriously? Compare average office rents for Class A space in Cleveland's CBD ($23.75/sq ft) vs. the CBDs of NYC/Toronto/Chicago ($50-90/sq ft). Then compare the construction costs, which are pretty comparable among metros due to prevailing wage requirements. C'mon people. If you want to see something built in the urban core to provide stronger competition to the sprawl, at least consider the economics involved here.

 

We have two basic choices -- Either have the State of Ohio or a new regional NE Ohio government establish urban growth boundaries some 5-10 miles inside the perimeter of the existing developed fringe and demolish a ton of existing suburban offices to raise rents on the remaining supply (especially in the urban core) or provide some big subsidies to overcome Cleveland's lowly rents. Which one do you think is more doable?

 

EDIT: of course, we could always just wait and hope for the economic behemoth that was Cleveland's economy 50-150 years ago to rise again.

 

 

Edited by KJP
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Seriously? Compare average office rents for Class A space in Cleveland ($23.75/sq ft) vs. NYC/Toronto/Chicago ($50-90/sq ft). Then compare the construction costs, which are pretty comparable among metros due to prevailing wage requirements. C'mon people. If you want to see something built in the urban core to provide stronger competition to the sprawl, at least consider the economics involved here.

 

We have two basic choices -- Either have the State of Ohio or a new regional NE Ohio government establish urban growth boundaries some 5-10 miles inside the perimeter of the existing developed fringe and demolish a ton of existing suburban offices to raise rents on the remaining supply (especially in the urban core) or provide some big subsidies to overcome Cleveland's lowly rents. Which one do you think is more doable?

 

I'm adding to the derailment of this conversation, but a cost of sprawl is the subsidizing of highways and the long ranging costs associated with roads as we expand them and build them further and further from the core. I'd argue that a healthy tax abatement is much cheaper in the long run than building a 14 lane highway to Aurora.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

I'm adding to the derailment of this conversation, but a cost of sprawl is the subsidizing of highways and the long ranging costs associated with roads as we expand them and build them further and further from the core. I'd argue that a healthy tax abatement is much cheaper in the long run than building a 14 lane highway to Aurora.

 

 Definitely don’t have to argue, the numbers speak for themselves .

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Seriously? Compare average office rents for Class A space in Cleveland's CBD ($23.75/sq ft) vs. the CBDs of NYC/Toronto/Chicago ($50-90/sq ft). Then compare the construction costs, which are pretty comparable among metros due to prevailing wage requirements. C'mon people. If you want to see something built in the urban core to provide stronger competition to the sprawl, at least consider the economics involved here.

 

We have two basic choices -- Either have the State of Ohio or a new regional NE Ohio government establish urban growth boundaries some 5-10 miles inside the perimeter of the existing developed fringe and demolish a ton of existing suburban offices to raise rents on the remaining supply (especially in the urban core) or provide some big subsidies to overcome Cleveland's lowly rents. Which one do you think is more doable?

 

EDIT: of course, we could always just wait and hope for the economic behemoth that was Cleveland's economy 50-150 years ago to rise again.

 

 

 

What if the city/county stopped demanding "prevailing wage" rates in exchange for the subsidy? How much would that lower construction costs? Enough to make prevailing rents match or approach building costs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most cases, the politicians do what their constituents request. There has been and continues to be demand for freeways to support exurban spread.

 

As I've mentioned throughout these threads, at one time, Cleveland (as well as, believe it or not, LA) had built phenomenal infrastructure to support urban transit. It was all ripped out in favor of freeways and turnpikes to support suburban sprawl. In the case of LA, its documented that GM purchased rights of way, shut them down and ripped them out to make way for the automobile.

The table is turning. It is up to the citizens to demand that their elected officials support greater utilization of the urban core, by focusing on rebuilding the infrastructure to support urbanization. Increased demand will drive prices, which in turn will foster continued development and growth.

  • Like 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, troeros said:

So the developer basically wanted a tax abatement that was never given to any developement in prior history?

 

I get the risk the developer is making, and sometimes you want to give developers additional flexibility because of the results (new residents, office workers, new tax income) that new development will bring to the city...

 

That said, it sort of angers me when developers want to push the envelope with smaller cities and get their ransom, but wouldn't dare ask for such high financial requests to develop in NYC/Toronto/Chicago, etc. 

 

🙄  Once again, incorrect. 

Edited by jeremyck01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ yes correct -- that is completely incorrect.

 

nyc is rife with tax abatement and incentives. you can bet developers dare ask and receive out here too -- ie., this one is a biggie:

 

What is a 421a Tax Abatement In NYC? A 421a tax abatement lowers your property tax bill by applying credits against the total amount you owe. It is most commonly granted to property developers in exchange for including affordable housing and the benefit lasts for 10 to 25 years.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is not whether a tax abatement should be provided for this. The question is if we’re ok with the state usurping the city’s authority and doing it without the approval or consent of the city

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, inlovewithCLE said:

The question is not whether a tax abatement should be provided for this. The question is if we’re ok with the state usurping the city’s authority and doing it without the approval or consent of the city

 

And for many, the question is both. I think if the state is going to give a tax abatement, it should be approved by the state only if the city AND the affected property taxing authorities all consent to the abatement. But some people don't like tax abatement at all, or only in exceptional cases.

  • Like 4

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

And for many, the question is both. I think if the state is going to give a tax abatement, it should be approved by the state only if the city AND the affected property taxing authorities all consent to the abatement. But some people don't like tax abatement at all, or only in exceptional cases.

Well the people who don’t like tax abatement at all are economically stupid lol, I’m not talking about them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI. Prevailing wage rates and benefit packages are far higher in NY, NJ, Chicago, Toronto etc. $20-40/hr higher in some jurisdictions.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Union journeyman carpenter wage in Cuyahoga County is around $32/hr. In Manhattan is close to $60/hr, with another $50-60/hr benefit package. This is a bs argument IMO

Edited by marty15
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, marty15 said:

Union journeyman carpenter wage in Cuyahoga County is around $32/hr. In Manhattan is close to $60/hr, with another $50-60/hr benefit package. This is a bs argument IMO

^Second this; I don’t understand the claim that construction costs in Cleveland are comparable to NYC/Chi/coastal metro’s...with what I know about Union trades wages in those towns I find this claim impossible to believe.

Does someone have data to support this?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except the labor costs at manufacturing facilities where the steel, concrete and other materials come from are probably pretty similar regardless of where those construction materials are destined.

  • Like 1

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, KJP said:

 

And for many, the question is both. I think if the state is going to give a tax abatement, it should be approved by the state only if the city AND the affected property taxing authorities all consent to the abatement. But some people don't like tax abatement at all, or only in exceptional cases.

 

Dumb question. If the state created a carbon tax, wouldn’t it not matter is the city wanted it or not? By the same token, if the feds did the same (yes, this is ridiculous in these administrations), wouldn’t it supersede the local government regardless of the local government’s stance on the issue?

 

Isn’t this basically the same concept but with a “carbon credit?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worthwhile theoreticals.

 

Fact is, the state has an incentive vehicle to enable the construction of office buildings. The city doesn't.

  • Like 1

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine that this adds to the complexity of (and delay in finalizing) the financial stacks for mixed-use developments. Nucleus immediately comes to mind with its combined residential and office tower development.

Edited by Frmr CLEder
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, marty15 said:

FYI. Prevailing wage rates and benefit packages are far higher in NY, NJ, Chicago, Toronto etc. $20-40/hr higher in some jurisdictions.  

 

If this is in response to me, that wasn't my question. Maybe I should have been clearer; but my question was: absent prevailing wage requirements, how closely would Cleveland's construction costs come to Cleveland's rent yields? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Clevecane said:

Dumb question. If the state created a carbon tax, wouldn’t it not matter is the city wanted it or not? By the same token, if the feds did the same (yes, this is ridiculous in these administrations), wouldn’t it supersede the local government regardless of the local government’s stance on the issue?

 

Isn’t this basically the same concept but with a “carbon credit?”

 

No, a carbon tax wouldn't take away local revenue that goes to the county or city. The city might not like it because it could affect employment but that's a separate discussion.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Record B19035642: 

Commercial Building Permit

Work Location

2021 W 25 ST
CLEVELAND OH 44113

 

Owner:

ohio city legacy llc

CLEVELAND OH

Number of Buildings:1

 

COMMERCIAL

New Construction

 

Size of Building:

Bldg Footprint (SqFt): 322346

  • Like 5
  • Love 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2019 at 3:19 PM, Mendo said:

 

No, a carbon tax wouldn't take away local revenue that goes to the county or city. The city might not like it because it could affect employment but that's a separate discussion.


My brain wants this to be semantics, but that’s why I’m not a lawyer. 🙂  

 

Hopefully the end product remains as awesome (and sustainable).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KJP any word on if the transformational tax credit would make the office component of this project doable? I feel like the project would fit the criteria needed for the credit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:

@KJP any word on if the transformational tax credit would make the office component of this project doable? I feel like the project would fit the criteria needed for the credit.

 

Harbor Bay reps say they believe that's the case as well, although the developer is planning to go ahead with the residential building over retail as phase 1. BTW, the target is start utilities work here on Feb. 1 and demolition/digging March 1.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if I missed any of these being posted previously but I have a few solid updates for the Hingetown area:

  • I live in a Hingetown apartment complex and residents received notice that one of our nearby parking lots (next to the Rex Auto Body shop @ the NE corner of Church and 28th) had been sold in the last 3 weeks. The lot was sold to Snavely and has already undergone demolition as part of their Phase 3 project.
  • Phase 3 is well underway. Contrary to @KJP's inkling (😉), work has not (yet) hit pause. In fact, there were crews working in the pouring rain as of this morning. They are really going to town here. Not only is the trenching nearly complete, the retaining walls and foundational framework is almost fully solidified. 
  • Re: the 25th Lofts building, the retail space at the front of the building is nearly full:
    • Light Touch Aesthetic Center (1512 W 25th) opened recently next to Bookhouse in the last month or so
    • Residents were advised that Key Bank purchased the remaining space (1500 W 25th) and is in the process of their buildout. There are construction crews in and out of the space on a daily basis. 
  • As you've likely seen posted by Cleveland Scene, a new Mediterranean restaurant - Alea - is opening in the next 2 weeks at 2912 Church Ave.
  • Church + State is coming along quickly and they are starting to move interior construction materials into the structure (e.g. drywall, countertop, tile). 

I have a slew of pictures and will try to add them here later today.

  • Like 13
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, tykaps said:

Building permit for site development was filed today! I was starting to miss seeing this project 🙂

 

Do you know what businesses are still operating in the strip center?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

Do you know what businesses are still operating in the strip center?

Rode by on the bus today, it looked like hr block, Sherwin Williams, and Key. There may be one or two more but it's looking pretty empty. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GISguy said:

Rode by on the bus today, it looked like hr block, Sherwin Williams, and Key. There may be one or two more but it's looking pretty empty. 

And Key already has a new space being prepared for their move. Not sure about the other two though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tykaps said:

Building permit for site development was filed today! I was starting to miss seeing this project 🙂

 

I love when you post lol. When I see your name I know it's some new development popping up and I get excited lol. 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tykaps said:

And Key already has a new space being prepared for their move. Not sure about the other two though.

 

The other two are on month-to-month leases. I believe SHW is moving down Lorain to the West 40s. Can't remember which development it's going into though.


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TIF for this project is up for approval on 12/6.

 

Ordinance No. xxx-2019(Ward 3/Councilmember McCormack): Authorizing the Mayor and the Commissioner of Purchases and Supplies to acquire and re-convey properties presently owned by Harbor Bay Real Estate Advisors, or its designee, located at the corner of West 25th Street and Lorain Avenue for the purpose of entering into the chain-of-title prior to the adoption of tax increment financing legislation authorized under Section 5709.41 of the Revised Code.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2019/12062019/index.php

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

City sets in motion tax-increment financing packages for 3 Cleveland apartment projects.

 

Last week the city planning commission approved legislation that would allow the city to enter into the chain of title for properties at the corner of Larchmere Boulevard and East 121st Street; the corner of West 25th Street and Lorain Avenue; and at 2048 Fulton Road.

 

Developers of all three projects sought 30-year, non-school TIFs...

 

The largest of the projects is Market Square, a mixed-use project by Chicago-area developer Harbor Bay Real Estate Advisors. The project, at the corner of West 25th Street and Lorain Avenue...

 

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2019/12/city-sets-in-motion-tax-increment-financing-packages-for-3-cleveland-apartment-projects.html

 

It will include nearly 300 apartment units, about 40,000 square feet of retail and event space, underground parking and an acre of green space

 

 

 

Edited by Larry1962
Added CLEVELAND.com link and more details
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Larry1962 said:

City sets in motion tax-increment financing packages for 3 Cleveland apartment projects.

 

Last week, the commission approved legislation that would allow the city to enter into the chain of title for properties at the corner of Larchmere Boulevard and East 121st Street; the corner of West 25th Street and Lorain Avenue; and at 2048 Fulton Road.

 

image.png.8129bb2e234a2cc4837aaee1d3912372.png

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...