The design of the project is pretty decent (much more fitting in the OTR landspace than say the Mercer Commons project)

 

 

That is a patently false statement. Nothing about this building fits into OTR. I don't like faux historic, but it goes nowhere near far enough to be a good example of it. It also goes nowhere near modern enough to differentiate itself.

 

It also doesn't bother trying to reference things like the pedestrian scale of the ground level of OTR, the graining of OTR, the proportions of buildings in OTR, the rhythm of OTR.

 

It's a terrible building. I'm excited about that much development in one spot, but let's not kid ourselves that this is in any way a step up from infill we've already seen in OTR.

The design of the project is pretty decent (much more fitting in the OTR landspace than say the Mercer Commons project)

 

 

That is a patently false statement. Nothing about this building fits into OTR. I don't like faux historic, but it goes nowhere near far enough to be a good example of it. It also goes nowhere near modern enough to differentiate itself.

 

It also doesn't bother trying to reference things like the pedestrian scale of the ground level of OTR, the graining of OTR, the proportions of buildings in OTR, the rhythm of OTR.

 

It's a terrible building. I'm excited about that much development in one spot, but let's not kid ourselves that this is in any way a step up from infill we've already seen in OTR.

 

You just don't like it, which is fine. Many others here agree that it's fairly decent looking project. Not the best, not the worst.

 

A terrible building is the gateway garage project on vine. It's just a giant blank red building. This at least blends somewhat within it's surroundings.

How? Nothing about it blends. It doesn't reference any of the things that define the character, stylistic or otherwise, of OTR. This has no relation to OTR at all.

 

It's more than me "not liking it." That sounds petty. It's about how buildings work within a context. This doesn't even bother trying beyond the very basic elements of urban design. It's lazy. It's bad design.

 

Buildings are a lot more than just looks. Their success is based on how they enhance their environment. Yes, this will be an improvement over an open lot, but it will leave a lot to be desired. I'd be willing to bet that the ground level of this building won't ever feel as active or exciting as any comparable stretch of storefronts in historic buildings in OTR. And there's a reason for that.

How? Nothing about it blends. It doesn't reference any of the things that define the character, stylistic or otherwise, of OTR. This has no relation to OTR at all.

 

It's more than me "not liking it." That sounds petty. It's about how buildings work within a context. This doesn't even bother trying beyond the very basic elements of urban design. It's lazy. It's bad design.

 

I'm not going to argue with you. I like it, you don't. Matter of the fact is that these large lots will always have trouble (at least at this early stage of OTR redevelopment phase) with the factors your looking for. At the very least, I'm happy that this is much improved upon compared to 3cdc efforts with Mercer, and The Gateway Garage project, and hope that future large lots will only improve on from here.

 

I know you are more intelligent when it comes to architecture and design due to your background, and thus look at architecture with different eyes than me. You see design and technicalities, I see is "feeling" or the vibe the building gives me. It's all good man.

I just wish they'd look at buildings like Rhinegeist or Streitmann for design inspiration for these larger buildings.  Rhinegeist is only 2 1/2 stories tall, and it's a block long.  That's exactly the sort of design "problem" these new developments are trying to overcome.  I guess busybody community councils don't see it that way and insist on all the needless in and out articulation that adds a lot of expense in foundations, corners, flashing, and materials, leading to the use of cheap stucco and simulated materials to try to recoup those expenses. 

 

It's basically the urban version of a McMansion.  What differentiates a McMansion from an actual mansion, or simply a nice classical house is all the unnecessary articulation on the front (nested gables, projecting garage masses, bays, dormers, material changes, turrets) and the resultant train wreck of a roof line.  Houses from the pre-war period have much simpler floor plates, usually just a rectangle, which allows for more resources to be devoted to details and materials.  Try to design a house like that today though, and you're kicked out of the room, despite that being what a lot of people are looking for. 

 

Same here in OTR.  All you really need to do to make a large project more palatable is good materials, simple effective detailing, and vertical as opposed to horizontal articulation of openings with a good sidewalk presence.  If you have to break it up some, use the natural interruption in the design like main entrances, garage entries, or public places to break up the mass.  Make it look like two or three buildings rather than 12.  Unfortunately that doesn't read as well in renderings, and the renderings hide the crappy detailing and materials that come with the Potemkin village designs. 

Does anyone know if planning commision approved the project? Source 3 was supposed to meet with the commission at 9am today.

^Tabled to Dec. 2.

New Luxury Infill is being proposed for Seitz St in OTR

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/november-21-2016-staff-report-and-attachments/

A lot of interesting things going on in that packet.

Just received a press release from Grandin Properties stating that the Strietmann building will have a 61,000 kWh solar array on the roof.

Sweet that's alot of panels, glad to see a green redevelopment project in otr.

Not trying to stray off topic here but does anybody have the numbers so far for investment in OTR along the streetcar route?

New Luxury Infill is being proposed for Seitz St in OTR

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/buildings/historic-conservation/historic-conservation-board/november-21-2016-staff-report-and-attachments/

 

An unfortunate priority on garage/garage doors on a street that probably never has an issue with street parking availability. Suburban Urbanism at its best... worst?

^Not to defend the design of these town homes, but if you're charging luxury prices, people will often want to know that their car will be protected. It's not just about street parking availability, it's also security. I'm a street parker myself, but I'm also a renter. If I owned a place, off street parking would be pretty high on my list of requirements, and covered/garage parking would be greatly preferred. If you're spending a bunch of money to live somewhere, you don't want to be dealing with your car getting blocked in by snow plow drifts, broken into, etc. It's not like there are near by garages that you could lease a space from. There's also not much pedestrian activity up on the hill, so the garages won't be destroying the pedestrian experience up there. Idk, I can live with these.

I really dislike those townhomes for many reasons, but I'll agree that if "luxury" townhomes with garages on their first level are to be built anywhere in the neighborhood this is where I'd prefer it to happen. These streets aren't ever going to be heavily pedestrian so it won't be taking away from much. And the curb cuts won't be removing a coveted street parking space like it would when it happens on, say, Republic Street.

 

Plus I don't blame them for this vertical arrangement of program. You are buying views up there. This just helps that. I get it. Don't necessarily like it, but I can live with this type of development happening on the roads encircling the hills surrounding the basin.

A lot of interesting things going on in that packet.

I was surprised (pleasantly) to see that 1400 block Elm building in there. This building has been stabilized but to a degree that I haven't seen before. It required wrapping the entire building with steel C-channel that I assume has to be permanent? And still the masonry has a very obvious bow to it. I'm impressed that someone thought to invest there as opposed to one of the other buildings on the block.

 

Then again, maybe it's the fact they had to demolish the back part of the original structure, and so more than half the lot is essentially open to design. Interesting.

Probably not permanent. It sounds like maybe the floors are having trouble (rotting ledgers or problems where the joists are notched into the masonry depending on construction type) which results in the masonry wall having to span further vertically between bracing points (each level) which is likely what's causing the bulging in the brick walls. Once the floors are repaired/replaced/supplemented/etc. it should be fine to then do more serious masonry work to bring everything back into alignment without the need for that temporary structural wrap.

Just received a press release from Grandin Properties stating that the Strietmann building will have a 61,000 kWh solar array on the roof.

 

Indeed.

 

Solar roof coming to huge Over-the-Rhine office building

 

 

The developer of the former Strietmann Biscuit Co. Building in Over-the-Rhine is installing a solar roof.

 

Grandin Properties, the Over-the-Rhine-based real estate company that focuses on development in walkable, urban areas, is investing more than $600,000 to install rooftop solar panels, a new roof and structural improvements. The solar roof will provide enough power to supply most of the needs of the building’s core and shell.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/11/22/solar-roof-coming-to-huge-over-the-rhine-office.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/11/28/over-the-rhine-retailer-to-close-doors-after-131.html

 

Sad, but times are changing and if you aren't like Elm and Iron/Ikea (hip and trendy catalog for Millenials, plus strong social media outreach and presence) than this is no doubt the likeliest of outcomes.  Excited for what can be done with this space though!

 

...Side note though, are the windows still blocked out like it is in that photo? If so, does anyone know why the windows are not restored and reopened?

^ "Without a successor in the family, the Mallins decided to close the store permanently."

 

It sounds like it's not closing because of a lack of business, just a lack of a family member to hand it down to.

Yes, the windows are still blocked and contained AC units. I've never been inside, but I imagine the windows were blocked to help with temperature control since they had furniture for sale on each floor.

Actually the old-school furniture stores are still hanging on because their customers vastly outnumber those going to Ikea and other chains and are intensely loyal.  Looks like these guys saw they could get well over $1 million for their building and decided to cash out. 

Interesting, hopefully this means the windows can be reopened again.

 

I'm wondering also what can go in that space? It's rather large, and contains 2 stories.

 

A part of me would think Elm and Iron would be interested in opening up a 3rd location by Findley Market/Rheingeist for those who doesn't frequent OTR South as much.

It's probably going to get gobbled up by Model Group and incorporated into Phase 2 of Market Square, which already includes most of the buildings on the west side of Elm. Ground floor retail + office or apts. above.

From the inimitable P. Casey Coston- http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/112916-soapdish-two-cities.aspx?utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=&utm_content=%7bEmail_Address%7d&utm_campaign=Is+Cincinnati+the+next+Detroit%3f+Not+so+fast

From the inimitable P. Casey Coston- http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/112916-soapdish-two-cities.aspx?utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=&utm_content=%7bEmail_Address%7d&utm_campaign=Is+Cincinnati+the+next+Detroit%3f+Not+so+fast

 

Downtown Detroit was pretty much *completely* abandoned in the late 1990s, which was definitely not the case in Cincinnati.  I went to Tiger Stadium the first time the Reds played there for interleague play in 1999 or thereabouts and we took a lap through downtown Detroit.  It was abandoned beyond belief, with old paperwork flying out of busted-out 25th-floor windows of old skyscrapers. 

 

 

From the inimitable P. Casey Coston- http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/112916-soapdish-two-cities.aspx?utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=&utm_content=%7bEmail_Address%7d&utm_campaign=Is+Cincinnati+the+next+Detroit%3f+Not+so+fast

 

Downtown Detroit was pretty much *completely* abandoned in the late 1990s, which was definitely not the case in Cincinnati.  I went to Tiger Stadium the first time the Reds played there for interleague play in 1999 or thereabouts and we took a lap through downtown Detroit.  It was abandoned beyond belief, with old paperwork flying out of busted-out 25th-floor windows of old skyscrapers. 

 

 

1999 was my heyday in downtown Detroit! Good times.

Park+Vine will close on January 15.

 

While I'm sure that some people on this forum will overreact and say this is a sign Main Street is dying, the news of Park+Vine's closure does not shock me. Park+Vine was one of the first businesses to open in the "Gateway Quarter" and helped draw people into the neighborhood, but I think Dan probably believes he accomplished the goals he set out to accomplish, and is ready to move on to something new. I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually opens a variant of a Park+Vine in another emerging neighborhood in Cincinnati.

Park+Vine will close on January 15.

 

While I'm sure that some people on this forum will overreact and say this is a sign Main Street is dying, the news of Park+Vine's closure does not shock me. Park+Vine was one of the first businesses to open in the "Gateway Quarter" and helped draw people into the neighborhood, but I think Dan probably believes he accomplished the goals he set out to accomplish, and is ready to move on to something new. I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually opens a variant of a Park+Vine in another emerging neighborhood in Cincinnati.

 

From their news release- "Korman said Park + Vine saw sales gains in 2016, with an increase of 10% compared to 2015. In all, the retailer is seeing its best sales in 2016."

 

Seems like you'd be able to sell the store as a going concern rather than close it.

 

 

Park+Vine will close on January 15.

 

While I'm sure that some people on this forum will overreact and say this is a sign Main Street is dying, the news of Park+Vine's closure does not shock me. Park+Vine was one of the first businesses to open in the "Gateway Quarter" and helped draw people into the neighborhood, but I think Dan probably believes he accomplished the goals he set out to accomplish, and is ready to move on to something new. I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually opens a variant of a Park+Vine in another emerging neighborhood in Cincinnati.

 

From their news release- "Korman said Park + Vine saw sales gains in 2016, with an increase of 10% compared to 2015. In all, the retailer is seeing its best sales in 2016."

 

Seems like you'd be able to sell the store as a going concern rather than close it.

 

Just because the sales volume increased does not mean it was a profitable business. Even if it was, rising rents could have deterred potential buyers. It was a wonderful staple of the neighborhood but my guess is that any interested buyer would have to take it on as a labor of love. Perhaps Korman did not have an appropriate successor and does not want his brand sullied by a "lesser" operator or perhaps he is looking to replicate the concept in a new neighborhood.

Anyone willing to translate for us non-subscribers?

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/11/30/heres-what-3cdc-believes-otr-is-still-missing.html

Anyone willing to translate for us non-subscribers?

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/11/30/heres-what-3cdc-believes-otr-is-still-missing.html

 

3CDC expresses jealousy of the tenant mix at the Oakley Station development.

 

Actually...

"This past year we've really focused on getting those soft goods retail tenants," he said. "Swoon (an intimate apparel retailer) just opened, and we've got two more women's stores in the works. As far as restaurants go, in the beginning it wasn't as attractive an area, so we'd take any restaurants – as long as they're quality concepts and quality chefs. Now, it's who can we bring in to support our existing tenants, so it's a bit more strategic."

 

There is still a need for restaurants that serve breakfast, he said. Taste of Belgium is the big player in that realm. Palazzolo would like to see a more traditional diner in the neighborhood. There's still room for more ethnic food as well, he said, like Indian and Chinese restaurants. And on the side streets he'd like to see things like fitness or retail tenants to support the restaurants.

Yeah, it's crazy that OTR doesn't have Indian food, Thai food, a 24/7 diner, a Cincinnati chili parlor, a grab-and-go sandwich place, etc. Those are the kinds of things that will make it feel like a real neighborhood instead of a nightlife/dining destination.

Well, it did have a diner...

Yeah, it's crazy that OTR doesn't have Indian food, Thai food, a 24/7 diner, a Cincinnati chili parlor, a grab-and-go sandwich place, etc. Those are the kinds of things that will make it feel like a real neighborhood instead of a nightlife/dining destination.

 

In 20 years (give or take) it will.

 

If I head correctly the owner of the downtown skyline is still massively afraid of OTR and still thinks its a murderous ghetto, so there definitely is still a perception problem of OTR to this day.

 

I also think there is still an over saturated amount of Bars as well in OTR, and I feel like because it's the safe way to make alot of money in OTR. We definitely need more establishments like Gomez. Too much of OTR is defined by Fine Dining restaurants, or Bars. We need more Tuckers. We need more Gomez like locations spread throughout the side streets of OTR.

 

This is the short list of new establishments still to come in OTR...

 

-Revel (wine bar on E12th st)

-Genius (Bar on Republic St)

-Bullhead Creamery (Alcholic Ice Cream bar on Main St)

-Mecca (just recently opened on Walnut St)

-Long Fellow (Bar to open on Clay St)

 

Notice how they are all bars and not dining options or casual European style cafes.

 

I just get the sense that Bars make money in OTR, but food concepts are far more risky and thats why we see less of them in OTR.

 

 

An interesting take on a Cincinnati chili parlor with beef, lamb, turkey, vegetarian versions of the chili etc would absolutely kill. Imagine what Senate does with hot dogs, except do that to Cincy Chili and it feels like a no-brainer. If it was open late night I would eat there about 52 times a year...

^Yes. So long as it wasn't $15 for a 3 way.

^ Exactly, you can make a pot of chili and spaghetti big enough to feed 10 people for about $7 (or closer to $10 if you use lamb, or closer to $5 if it is veggie chili). I do it about once a month and then freeze it to eat for a few weeks. There's definitely some potential for this idea - it is a cool recipe to play around with.

There is definitely not an over saturation of bars. They are usually packed, and I believe the rumor mill has been saying Neon's and maybe another could possibly close soon.

 

Just to add, I still think that the neighborhood could use a pedestrian only street with areas for dining like there are in Europe. Not sure how this would add to the diversity of offerings but still, I feel it's something that would benefit a lot of people.

There is definitely not an over saturation of bars. They are usually packed, and I believe the rumor mill has been saying Neon's and maybe another could possibly close soon.

 

Just to add, I still think that the neighborhood could use a pedestrian only street with areas for dining like there are in Europe. Not sure how this would add to the diversity of offerings but still, I feel it's something that would benefit a lot of people.

 

The owner of Neons already chimed in another thread. He's moving Neon's to a different location in OTR...from what I understand a 3cdc owned spot.

^ Neon's will definitely not be moving to a 3CDC-owned spot.

They are closing their current location. Have no immediate plans to reopen in another location, but have been evaluating options for a while.

They are closing their current location. Have no immediate plans to reopen in another location, but have been evaluating options for a while.

 

From Neon's owner in the Cincy Bar thread...

 

We are in negotiations and have been working on an alternative location in OTR since 2013.  We hope to announce more on that very soon assuming we can wrap up a few final details

 

It sounds like they have a location in mind, and are close to announcing the new spot assuming they can get everything tied together.

They have been linked to the old Grammer's site multiple times. Lots of tire kicking. 4EG is going to take over the old Neon's site.

^Is that confirmed re: 4EG? I've been half joking about that for a while. I figure someone with money came in and offered the building owners more money, and 4EG seemed like a safe guess, but it was all speculation on my part.

They have been linked to the old Grammer's site multiple times. Lots of tire kicking. 4EG is going to take over the old Neon's site.

 

I imagine that's hard to happen since the Wade Project seems to be dead, and I imagine rehabilitating the Grammer Bar building would cost quite a bit.

 

I think the Old Weilert Building with the beer garden in the back would be a much perfect suitor. Especially since 3cdc owns it, and is going to rehabilitate the building soon anyways (hopefully at least)/

^I'd be surprised if they went to renting a large space for Neon's 3.0. I think they've been beaten down pretty good from not owning their bar that they wouldn't consider renting again unless conditions were just right, but idk.

Does someone have the rights to the name "Neon's?" If they moved to a new location - would they keep that name or would that confuse customers? Maybe they could go with "Argon's" or one of the other noble gases? Or "Halogen's" if they want to stick with the lighting concept.

I'm assuming they have rights to their business name, and it isn't held with the building owner. But you never know (unless you look it up with the State or something).

Does someone have the rights to the name "Neon's?" If they moved to a new location - would they keep that name or would that confuse customers? Maybe they could go with "Argon's" or one of the other noble gases? Or "Halogen's" if they want to stick with the lighting concept.

 

Fluorescent's. Where every space is uncomfortably over-lit with crappy fluorescent tubes and carries the quality of a mid 80s laundromat that can barely stay afloat.