rontun

Mr. Skinner, The final sentence in this paragraph is patently untrue. Lanny Holbrook has owned the building for well over a decade. Moreover, he's maintained his law offices in the building and has attempted to find ways to make the property viable as an office structure. However, the market simply doesn't exist for Class B office space when there is such a plethora of cheap Class A space on the market. I know nothing about Lanny's other real estate holdings aside from his past ownership of the marina. He sought for years a partner to develop that site to no avail. Please understand that Mr. Holbrook is an attorney, not a real estate developer, and he doesn't pretend to be the latter. His real estate acquisitions have been solely for investment purposes. Not that kind of slum, just lack of maintenance and bleeding the buildings until they are unlivable. Miller Valentine is a good contractor/developer, but it is the actual property owner, Holbrook who should not be trusted IMO. As an example look how 4th and Race Tower has gone downhill since he bought it just 3 years ago.

Personally, I'd prefer seeing the base of the Terrace adapted for use as a casino rather than consuming the enormous Broadway Commons site for such usage. The windowless feature fits perfectly with casino design, and the 45,000 s.f. footprint would allow for a grand, multi-level casino facility that could incorporate retail into the remainder of the base. Adequate parking could be accommodated by a multi-story garage on the surface parking lot running between Fifth & Sixth Streets on the west side of Race, atop which could be constructed apartment/condo and/or hotel towers. What troubles me about the Broadway Commons casino proposal is that it is cheesy, resembling some of the casinos operated by Indian tribes in the midwest. If Cincinnati is going to allow casino gambling, it should opt for a first-class facility that will truly be an overnight destination location.

Actually, most municipalities have strict guidelines when it comes to building heights. In Cincinnati, as in most major cities, height determinations are calculated utilizing an FAR, or Floor Area Ratio. In essence, whatever the floor area ratio, which in the case of East Third Street I believe is 11, the total amount of square footage of the building is restricted to 11 times the square footage of the underlying building site. In the case of Queen City Square, the new tower occupies a site that is roughly 80,000 s.f. Thus the total building area would be limited to 880,000 square feet. From what I've seen of the building's plans, at least three stories will occupy the entire half-block, taking approximately 240,000 s.f of allowable space. That leaves 640,000 s.f. for the tower itself. Approximately 120,000 s.f of the first three floors are also included in the tower, which would bring the total to 760,000 s.f. Now, a developer could build a much higher building if the floorplate was smaller. But given the size of the underlying building site and the size of the floorplate, I'd say that QCII has maxed out its buildable space and height. The "Tiara", since it does not include any useable floor space, is not included in the equation.

Willie may be correct that you can't walk through Over-the-Rhine without being accosted, whatever that's supposed to mean. But that's no different anywhere else in the city. If accosted means an unwelcome approach by someone of dubious character or intent, I can state flatly that people in the suburbs endure that on a daily basis. How many phone calls come in from tele-marketers, or how much junk mail fills one's mailbox each and every day? And what about those religious missionaries such as Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses who feel compelled to assault their neighbors with their "special brand" of faith? Kids are constantly ringing the doorbell selling candy, magazines, girl scout cookies, etc. We live in a community and have to accept that not every encounter is going to be to our liking or choosing. Too bad.