Pdrome513

https://cagis.hamilton-co.org/opal/apd.aspx?QSPerm=2019P02771 Would this be for Lot 24? The address (10 E Mehring Way) seems to be west of Anderson Pavilion but different map services return different results.

Be that as it may.

Perhaps an unpopular opinion, and certainly a biased one coming from a vegetarian, but I get sick just walking past Boi Na Braza, and I'm not entirely upset its closing. Even Jeff Ruby's has an inviting exterior. The way Boi Na Braza looks from the outside, I would imagine they hook you up to pumps that feed you the beef intravenously... or, at any rate, something just a bit less grotesque. Another restaurant should do well there. Like The Anchor's space, this is one of the prime spots in Cincinnati, and it can likely be better utilized.

They aren't die hard about it. They wanted to move as recently as a year ago. They even went out of their way to alert the media of the beginning of their site-selection process. As to what's happened since then, well, it's pretty clear. I don't blame them for wanting something of a payout from FCC, it's just unfortunate the process isn't a bit more backroom (and a bit less front page.) A public fight really doesn't do either organization any good, though obviously they made the calculation--likely a correct one--that FCC's reputation is the more delicate and susceptible, and that's very much part of this as well.

^^is that whatsoever connected to Reztark's Rookwood redesign? http://reztark.com/en/portfolio-item/rookwood/ Or perhaps firms like that just put out work of that nature to show what their style is. (Reztark are the folks behind the Fountain Square high rise rendering. Found this rendering while I was poking around their website in consequence of that.)

SIAP: Permit application for Liberty and Elm: https://cagis.hamilton-co.org/opal/apd.aspx?QSPerm=2018P10246 Hopefully this can get started soon.

They're starting demolition ?

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/october-22-2018-staff-report-and-attachments-items-3-6/

Random question for those who might know TIFs better than me (i.e. anyone with a pulse): Because the city owned the property prior to selling it to the lessee, do all the proceeds from the sale of the Whex garage (~$1.8m) go directly into the relevant TIF account? Or is that windfall not part of the so-called "tail"?

Accepting your premise that there do seem to be issues around most corners, the reasoning is likely that FCC is starting MLS play in 2019, and as such things need to move at a faster pace than normal. FCC doesn't want to be another Minnesota. That is, they want to be competing for titles right out of the gate. Hence the added urgency in terms of getting all their infrastructure up and running ASAP. The philosophy seems to be, if they have to cut corners here and there, so be it. If I was worth $x billion, I might think the same way. (I'm not, and I don't.)

Out of curiosity, why would Epicurean Mercantile be applying for a new liquor license after they've already announced they're going out of business? Permit, dated Sept. 6: http://city-egov.cincinnati-oh.gov/Webtop/ws/council/public/child/Blob/51248.pdf?rpp=-10&m=1&w=doc_no%3D%27201801344%27 Also, unrelated to that, looks like new townhomes are ready to go up 1508-1524 Pleasant Street. Permits applied for last Friday, though I don't remember seeing anything in any planning packet or HCB packet.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2018/08/16/fourth-and-race-development-finally-goes-forward-downtown-cincinnati/1009078002/ "Construction could begin immediately after the changes are approved. The developers expect to complete the garage by September 2019 and the entire project by the summer of 2020." Wohoo!

Agreed about the Royal, you can even imagine an identical pub opening in the same space with a new name in 18 months and maybe it does really well. (Though some more vegetarian food wouldn't kill them.) About Epicurean Mercantile, I feel like you could see that coming from a mile away. The prices were high, the produce wasn't reliably fresh or even present, the location was poor, and with the new Kroger going in you felt it was only a matter of time. That said, the food from the Counter was delicious and I'll miss that at least. But again, it always seemed like a business that was just a year too early for its ambitions.

Capital 'C' Conspiracy theory: What if Rhinegeist is looking to privately finance part of the McMicken Ave./McMillan streetcar extension that was the preferred extension route of the 2009 feasibility study? At a cost of $69 million (in 2009 dollars), might they be able to put enough in that matching grants, city/state funds, and UC/Uptown Consortium would be able to get this over the hump? Then those property purchases makes sense because by flipping them they'd probably be able to recoup what they put into the project. Sort of like an entirely private TIF district. At any rate, that's my dreamiest dream scenario.

This might fall into the "I have too much time on my hands" category of posts, but whatever. A while back an LLC named Franz Fund began acquiring a large number of buildings and empty parcels in Mohawk, specifically along Mohawk Street and Renner Street. The LLC belongs to Bob Bonder, founder of Rhinegeist. I suppose it isn't unusual that this is taking place, but the sheer number of properties purchased (more than 20, if memory serves) struck me as unusual. What deepened my interest was the Reddit rumor of a privately funded Rhinegeist gondola a while back. Notwithstanding its accuracy, the rumor seemed to signal a greater than normal interest in neighborhood development. Again, it makes sense that Rhinegeist would want a vibrant neighborhood surrounding its headquarters, especially when (I believe) they have large national ambitions. The question is how that interest materializes. I bring all that up now because the purchases appear to be ongoing; the LLC purchased 312 Mohawk this month. Perhaps this is just private land banking. But I wonder if anyone might have an informed guess as to what, if anything, is going on there?

Fortus has applied for a wrecking permit for the Boys and Girls Club building on Logan Street. They purchased it last year after they joined in on Freeport Row. https://cagis.hamilton-co.org/opal/apd.aspx?QSPerm=2018P06275

Well, fore example, wasn't the new bar by the owners of Senate at the corner of Liberty and Walnut downsized because they had to include more space for parking?

If it doesn't matter who programs the venue, then what exactly is PromoWest's advantage? Seems to be the property taxes PromoWest would pay that CSO would not, though CSO has offered to pay the ticket taxes. The tradeoff, then, is [x amount in property taxes] versus [CSO's reinvestment of revenues in cultural events benefiting the city] plus [guaranteed use and fair compensation of union workers] plus [the reclaimed opportunity cost of real estate at The Banks Promowest would have used] plus [the possibility of incorporating the CSO venue into an astounding weekend-long concert festival on the banks of the river that would be an incomparable showcase for the city, many times moreso than Bunbury]. Perhaps you've decided the equation comes out in favor of PromoWest. That's fine. But I wouldn't fault these specific proceedings for showcasing Cincinnati provincialism (as I fear the city hall lot development will). Indeed just as we should be wary of that provincialism, we should also be wary of the reflexive opposite, a fearful wilting in the face of a good argument just because it might appear provincial on its face. PromoWest might be the out-of-town option, but Cincinnati shouldn't feel compelled to go with them just to escape a stereotype. That is, there are reasons to favor CSO's bid.

I suppose my point was implicit: If both venues are programmed equivalently, then neither the Banks steering committee nor the commissioners nor city council had anything to gain by factoring venue programming into their respective decisions. I understand the process by which this came about irritates you, but in terms of the result, it isn't worth excoriating any of those parties on the basis of a criterion they didn't consider.

That "Jack White" story made the rounds last week but I don't see why it matters. LiveNation will be booking the acts for the venue. Yes they do the same for Riverbend, and people are right to bemoan the nature of those acts, but they also got Spoon and Grizzly Bear next month. (I don't know whether LN does Taft, but in any case MEMI does... them getting Janelle Monae is another huge success... she is absolutely on fire right now and is beloved by the Millennial female demo, including my wife.) In fact I would suggest the acts booked for Riverbend indicate market savvy, as that sort of suburban beltway venue caters successfully to suburban beltway music connoisseurs. Would a couple in their 40's living outside the city even know the likes of Grizzly Bear? Doubt it. By that token, cannibalization will be minimal, as no one can seriously make the point that LiveNation would program the Banks venue and Riverbend similarly. Of course there're arguments to be made against CSO's proposal, but I don't believe act booking is one of them.

About treehouse, I had an enlightening experience talking at a bar with a few African American guys who love that place. I was surprised considering the press it's gotten. For my part, I had always avoided it because I assumed, as did my friends, that what they did was tantamount to profiling. But these guys said the so-called "dress code" was the very reason they liked it there, because the folks it keeps out are legit dangerous and the other clubs downtown don't take such precautions. Just thought that was an interesting counterpoint to pass along. It might attract some unsavory characters, but perhaps it's a good thing in the broader scheme of things.

3CDC should only allow national retailers if they don't undercut local competition by offering lower quality, readymade, meretricious goods. The swill that is Starbucks coffee would be the example par excellence of that.

It would take another 20 years of urban core revitalization to pull the ATP crowd downtown to see a tennis match. That crowd is made of CHL and beltway folk, mostly boomers who belong to golf clubs and have long driveways and big patios. Yes, those people go to FCC matches, and they come to OTR for birthday dinners and charity events and weekend Findlay trips. And yes, there are FCC folk like myself go to the ATP every year because that's just what we grew up doing. But there isn't as much marketable overlap as you'd think. Personally I would love the idea of putting the ATP in Queensgate to round out a crescent of GABP, PBS, and FCC, very much like Melbourne's swath of stadiums. But it isn't even a consideration at this point. The ATP thrives where it currently is specifically because it's such a featureless and benign experience right up until the first swing of the racquet. FCC is a different beast in nearly every way. Its supporters might live in Oakley and Mason in addition to the core, but fundamentally it's an urban phenomenon, an expression of "the city" as a phenomenological entity--and thus a marketable classification.

Everyone already agrees with this. It's why so many people spend so much time posting on here, and why people like me enjoy reading what they've written. The key is, do you have anything interesting to say, anything substantive, anything data-driven, anything that would require a level of expertise unavailable to the public at large. If not, consider not posting, even if what you have to say is, from your point of view, benign.

I disagree with literally everything in this paragraph.