I don't like that they went with "Prominent Retailer" for the signage in that rendering, and I think I make out some signage on the 4th Street side that just says "Signage." Coming up with dumb faux names for those signs is one of best parts about creating renderings.

Whoever it was on this board who didn't like the recent offset asymetrical window trend is going to lose it.

 

That would be me! I do think it looks stupid, but it's especially egregious in Over-the-Rhine. I think in 10 years we'll look back and say, what were they thinking? Not as mad about this building having them.

 

It seems like it would make construction unnecessarily harder too. Workers want repetition, and if you switch the window opening every floor you're going to get slower work and likely mistakes. Doesn't make any sense to me.

Oooh, definitely excited for "prominent retailer" to move into the neighborhood.

 

I hope it's Saks, so they can knock the current Saks building down and build a residential tower there too.

I don't like that they went with "Prominent Retailer" for the signage in that rendering, and I think I make out some signage on the 4th Street side that just says "Signage." Coming up with dumb faux names for those signs is one of best parts about creating renderings.

 

I was really hoping for a Bugo Hoss, Barnes & Others, or Chipelto.

The 4th Street side looks a little matchy-matchy with Dunnhumby 84.51. 

I feel like it rises up to a certain level and just has a hard stop whereas other buildings have a more defined top point, if this makes any sense, from my non expert background.

 

While I would have loved a 30 story tower, I also see benefits to the lower building, plus it is not like it was replacing a taller structure and this building will be taller. However, a 30 story tower would block the Hyatt which would probably not be good for the hotel.

This looks like another drag-and-drop building for DT Cincinnati.  An innocuous building with a massively corrupt back-story that will never be made public. 

 

 

 

 

Speaking of the Saks building, I would really like to see the north facade of this new building as it'll be interesting to see how it faces the Hyatt and Saks. The Saks site would be great for a taller tower.

 

Quote from: Ram23 on Today at 11:23:09 AM

I don't like that they went with "Prominent Retailer" for the signage in that rendering, and I think I make out some signage on the 4th Street side that just says "Signage." Coming up with dumb faux names for those signs is one of best parts about creating renderings.

 

I was really hoping for a Bugo Hoss, Barnes & Others, or Chipelto.

 

I don't know if downtown can support two Chipeltos!  I haven't heard how the original Banks location is doing :-D

Speaking of the Saks building, I would really like to see the north facade of this new building as it'll be interesting to see how it faces the Hyatt and Saks. The Saks site would be great for a taller tower.

 

 

They should design this building in such a way that when Saks eventually closes, they can demolish Saks and essentially extend the 4th & Race project onto that site. If the parking garage could be extended onto the Saks site, you wouldn't need another curb cut on Race, like you would if the future Saks replacement is a standalone project.

An old envisioning for comparison:

 

 

So we won't have the skyline-alterer we hoped for.

What an improvement over what is currently there and also, it will help with redevelopment on Fourth Street with all the added parking.

 

I wish I knew how to save a google streetview image and post direct for before after, but here is a link from approximately the same angle of what is there currently:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0997537,-84.5140413,3a,75y,298.51h,109.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sybeRjP83xqkvHSw5aOznhw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

 

 

Speaking of the Saks building, I would really like to see the north facade of this new building as it'll be interesting to see how it faces the Hyatt and Saks. The Saks site would be great for a taller tower.

 

 

They should design this building in such a way that when Saks eventually closes, they can demolish Saks and essentially extend the 4th & Race project onto that site. If the parking garage could be extended onto the Saks site, you wouldn't need another curb cut on Race, like you would if the future Saks replacement is a standalone project.

 

It would not be very easy to demolish Saks because the Hotel is right there. If you look at your photo. Saks is a 2 story department store. The third story that juts out over half of Saks is actually the hotel ballroom. I don't think the Hyatt would want to give up their ballroom for a redevelopment project very easily.

I did not realize that the hotel's ballroom sits above Saks. That certainly complicates future redevelopment plans for that site. Doesn't make it impossible, just adds a major complication.

Lets take a nostalgic trip back in time to when the Pogue's garage was....

 

UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!

 

West 1966 -27 by Michael G Smith, on Flickr

I did not realize that the hotel's ballroom sits above Saks. That certainly complicates future redevelopment plans for that site. Doesn't make it impossible, just adds a major complication.

 

I wonder how many years in advance the ballroom is booked?

OT for second...but how did they manage parking in those lots? I've seen tons of these old pics where the cars are just crammed into lots nose-to-tail.

 

Also, that excavation on the north side of Fifth. It looks like you can see the old foundations.

OT for second...but how did they manage parking in those lots? I've seen tons of these old pics where the cars are just crammed into lots nose-to-tail.

 

Also, that excavation on the north side of Fifth. It looks like you can see the old foundations.

 

I don't know specifically about how parking like that was handled in Cincinnati, but in New York City they have several lots like these (as well as ones where cars are stacked on lifts) and they are all manned by attendants who keep the keys and park/retrieve your car valet-style.

They still do this at the lot just north of Jeff Ruby's steakhouse. 

^There are lots like that in many places, including in Downtown Cincinnati.  You just give them your keys and they move the other cars and bring yours around...pretty simple.

When was that pic taken? I love the old photo of the convention center before it was remodeled in the 80's.

 

I remember going there in the early 80s when it still looked like that.

^There are lots like that in many places, including in Downtown Cincinnati.  You just give them your keys and they move the other cars and bring yours around...pretty simple.

 

Many of the lots that park cars this way don't even use attendants.  I'm not sure what the exact system is, but the lots across 13th from the old SCPA cram cars in nose to tail like that, and there are no attendants for most of them.

Back on topic a bit, how much stock should be put into the renderings that were recently released? I'd like to see more attention paid to the corner sections of the building at both Race and Elm. Even if they just added a few floors of set back units with large balconies/outdoor spaces, it would help the building look less boxy and flat topped.

When was that pic taken? I love the old photo of the convention center before it was remodeled in the 80's.

 

I remember going there in the early 80s when it still looked like that.

 

You can guess it was the 60s just by the colors of the parked cars.  They're much lighter than those of the 70s, 80s, or recent decades.  Also, the caption says 1966.  ;-)

The corner glass articulation makes it look like an odd office building with some residential balconies sprouting out. It's good to see colour but the combination feels a bit dated. And the residential parts of the facade sort of reminds me of what they've just put up in Northside along Hamilton. I think we all agree that this could be loads better. Alas, I suppose in typical Cincinnati fashion....something is better than nothing.

Sigh.....http://cin.ci/1tmxZW6. Will this ever happen or will there always be something that pushes it back?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blame Cranley. Wouldn't this be done by now if not for his intervention in the parking thing?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blame Cranley. Wouldn't this be done by now if not for his intervention in the parking thing?

 

I don't think so.  They couldn't do anything, regardless of Cranley's meddling, until Paragon Salon relocated which only happened recently. 

Blame Cranley. Wouldn't this be done by now if not for his intervention in the parking thing?

 

I don't think so.  They couldn't do anything, regardless of Cranley's meddling, until Paragon Salon relocated which only happened recently. 

 

I still blame Cranley. :) The city broke Paragon's lease and paid for them to relocate to another retail space. The city could have done this 3 years ago instead of trying to fight it and then ultimately surrendering anyway. The main reason that this project got held up is that Cranley deemed the city's investment in this project as "too rich" so it got taken back to the drawing board and downsized. The money that the city "saved" by reducing their investment in Fourth and Race got shifted over to the Eighth and Sycamore project. So instead of having the Fourth and Race tower completed by now (with a full service grocery store operating at ground level!), we got the Eighth & Sycamore "Cincinnati Special" (apartments above a massive parking garage) and a downsized 4th & Race delayed for 4 years.

Blame Cranley. Wouldn't this be done by now if not for his intervention in the parking thing?

 

I don't think so.  They couldn't do anything, regardless of Cranley's meddling, until Paragon Salon relocated which only happened recently. 

 

I still blame Cranley. :) The city broke Paragon's lease and paid for them to relocate to another retail space. The city could have done this 3 years ago instead of trying to fight it and then ultimately surrendering anyway. The main reason that this project got held up is that Cranley deemed the city's investment in this project as "too rich" so it got taken back to the drawing board and downsized. The money that the city "saved" by reducing their investment in Fourth and Race got shifted over to the Eighth and Sycamore project. So instead of having the Fourth and Race tower completed by now (with a full service grocery store operating at ground level!), we got the Eighth & Sycamore "Cincinnati Special" (apartments above a massive parking garage) and a downsized 4th & Race delayed for 4 years.

 

This stuff takes time and is a negotiation process. You cant just break the bank to get Paragon out, it is a negotiation process. Paragon did not want to leave, period, forcing them out was a delicate process.

I am not happy this has dragged on for so long, but I think the project will be a good one.  To think, this is a massive project with the demolition, construction of the ramp and then apartments.  With the PNC Bank Annex Building and this coming online close to the same time, it's going to be a huge jolt to the "heart" of downtown.  I think it worked out okay as we get two large apartment buildings, and two eye sores taken care of instead of 1.  Plus, the economics have gotten better I presume since they first announced the projects.  Either way, I am just happy it is moving forward and they didn't completely chase off the developer.  I hope the developer looks to do more in the future with less and less city money as we move forward.  That is the key point.

 

If we can keep attracting new employers and specifically some out of state employment wins to downtown to add to GE, downtown rental rates per square foot will continue to increase making surface lots more and more feasible with less and less city money.  The momentum is good.

I am not happy this has dragged on for so long, but I think the project will be a good one.  To think, this is a massive project with the demolition, construction of the ramp and then apartments.  With the PNC Bank Annex Building and this coming online close to the same time, it's going to be a huge jolt to the "heart" of downtown.  I think it worked out okay as we get two large apartment buildings, and two eye sores taken care of instead of 1.  Plus, the economics have gotten better I presume since they first announced the projects.  Either way, I am just happy it is moving forward and they didn't completely chase off the developer.  I hope the developer looks to do more in the future with less and less city money as we move forward.  That is the key point.

 

If we can keep attracting new employers and specifically some out of state employment wins to downtown to add to GE, downtown rental rates per square foot will continue to increase making surface lots more and more feasible with less and less city money.  The momentum is good.

Has there been any recent news on the PNC tower annex? 

Blame Cranley. Wouldn't this be done by now if not for his intervention in the parking thing?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I was mostly just trying to stir the pot.

Wow- The old Convention Center really looks like a lot of municipal and church buildings i grew up with in LA.  It especially looks like the Christ Cathedral Arboretum (Formerly the Crystal Cathedral Arboretum, which was the original 1960's building of the church before the more famous 80's glass structure was built).

 

 

Panel: Fourth and Race project design 'frenetic'

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2016/06/28/panel-fourth-and-race-project-design-frenetic/86491946/

Sometimes less is more when it comes to building design.

 

That’s what members of Cincinnati’s Urban Design Review Board said Tuesday to architects of a more than $100 million development at Fourth and Race streets. The Atlanta-based Preston Partnership made an hour-long presentation with renderings and design plans for the more than $100 million downtown development project.

 

This quote from John Sennhauser:

“The rhythms and scale on Fourth Street are among the most important in the city,” Senhauser said. “As we introduce a new building, how do you reinforce what exists on the other side of the street. I have trouble understanding the language of this building.”

"...I have trouble understanding the language of this building.”

 

It's the same "trendy" crap everyone's been doing for the past 5 years.  Say what you will about boring glass and steel high rises, they've been around long enough and so many have been built that they've achieved a sort of "modern timeless" quality all their own.  This other stuff that jumps and spins and zig zags and twirls and gesticulates wildly while trying to pretend to be multiple buildings is so incoherent as to be incomprehensible. 

I would call that building a number of things but "frenetic" would not be the word.

I would call that building a number of things but "frenetic" would not be the word.

 

If it was on pills, which pill?

I'm not exactly convinced this project would have ever been built to the scale when they first announced it. I also think it was probably smart to tone down public investment on this project and keep the parking asset for the city to own and manage. Some of the financial wizardry they are still doing with nearly every single large scale project downtown and in OTR is pretty interesting to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but it still doesn't seem like we're at the point where most projects can stand on their own like they do in other cities. (I'm temporarily living in Boston right now, you don't see these private/public partnerships or dependence on tax credits on all the new development going on here. I know Cincinnati really still isn't close to that point yet.... but yay subsidized housing for all! :wink: HA)

 

I like a lot of the design elements of the building, but I think they could simplify it a bit. Reminds me a lot of the 84.51 building...

Cincinnati like many cities its size is certainly a laggard compared to SF, NYC, Boston, etc. on the back-to-the-city movement.  Nevertheless, what we're seeing in those cities is markets that are starting to boom *despite* all of the anti-urban, pro-suburban, pro-rural policies that are still in place at the national, state, and even still at the city level, not to mention policies held by private companies that also have a lot of skin in the game (banks, insurers, etc.).  50+ years of deliberate disinvestment has taken so much of a toll that the innate market forces simply can't be hidden anymore.  If all these bad policies could be stripped away and the innate efficiency of cities was allowed to be expressed rather than suppressed, then we wouldn't need to rely on PPP's or tax credits or all these other financial shenanigans to get projects done.  I think it's only a matter of time before we're forced to allow that to happen, because we simply can't afford to keep propping up unsustainable suburbs by draining resources out of cities.

I would call that building a number of things but "frenetic" would not be the word.

 

If it was on pills, which pill?

 

This actually looked like a cool project when it was first envisioned.  Now it just looks sad.  I'm thinking Cranley would've been happy with something like some ranch style one story homes put at this location.  He stuck his face into it and turned it into a piece big pile of $#!*  He lowered what the city was contributing to the project, but it just lowered the amount of units by a 1/3 and transferred that to another project.  So in the end, I'm thinking we still get the same amount of units and the city still put in the same dollars, just spread out (suburban mentality).  That corner needed as many residential units as possible and he f'd it up.  If he doesn't want the city to look and feel like a city, then he should go be mayor of some suburban location. 

This actually looked like a cool project when it was first envisioned.  Now it just looks sad.  I'm thinking Cranley would've been happy with something like some ranch style one story homes put at this location.  He stuck his face into it and turned it into a piece big pile of $#!*  He lowered what the city was contributing to the project, but it just lowered the amount of units by a 1/3 and transferred that to another project.  So in the end, I'm thinking we still get the same amount of units and the city still put in the same dollars, just spread out (suburban mentality).  That corner needed as many residential units as possible and he f'd it up.  If he doesn't want the city to look and feel like a city, then he should go be mayor of some suburban location.

 

So a different perspective... Even if I accept your premise regarding those two developments, the city is getting two notable developments in two areas of downtown that have more units, more parking, more commercial space then the original fourth and race proposal(and the garage that supports the development of the holiday inn next door). The city is getting more private investment, better terms in the deal, and didn't have to privatize parking assets to do that. I know folks here don't like Cranley, but I do think some of his work is well intended.

Pogue's Garage set to close as Fourth and Race development kicks off

Jul 22, 2016, 11:28am EDT

Erin Caproni

Digital Producer

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

Pogue’s Garage in downtown Cincinnati will close this weekend to make way for the long-awaited development planned for Fourth and Race streets.

 

The garage will officially close at 3 p.m. Sunday, July 24. Alternative parking can be found at the 84.51 garage one block north or at the Fountain Square North garage.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/07/22/pogues-garage-set-to-close-as-fourth-and-race.html

There is a lot of activity going on at the Pogue garage. I see a lot of construction cones and 3CDC demo signs at each entrance

Thank god this eyesore will finally be gone

From the Cincinnati Business Journal, a redo:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/08/05/panel-fourth-race-project-design-better-but-try.html

Final design approved

 

 

I saw somewhere that garage demo beings Sept. 10.

Tear it down!