well this topic got a little off the rails.

On 1/6/2021 at 10:02 AM, Yves Behar said:

well this topic got a little off the rails.

 

I'm surprised nobody is interested in the details of my original post.  From the article:

 

Quote

Total cost of the development project must exceed $50 million and include a combination of retail, office or residential space and have either 15 stories in height or be 350,000 square feet or more in size, according to the Greater Ohio Policy Center, the nonprofit organization said in a review of pending legislation at its website.

 

Edited January 7, 20214 yr by nicker66

1 minute ago, nicker66 said:

 

I'm surprised nobody is interested in the details of my original post.  From the article:

 

 

Hopefully this helps jumpstart whatever development is being planned at 435 Elm street.

2 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

Hopefully this helps jumpstart whatever development is being planned at 435 Elm street.

or help wiht the new convention center hotel

Is there a design or financial reason for setting the starting point at 15 stories or 350k sqft?

31 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

or help wiht the new convention center hotel

Hopefully. I wasn’t sure if it would be considered since it stated that it had to be mixed use, but I’m assuming that if theres a new addition including the hotel then it would fall under mixed use. 

41 minutes ago, Dev said:

Is there a design or financial reason for setting the starting point at 15 stories or 350k sqft?

I think they just want it to be for big developments.  This is Ohio so 15 stories qualifies as being "big" here. And if it's not going to be that tall, it better take up basically an entire city block. 

21 hours ago, Dev said:

Is there a design or financial reason for setting the starting point at 15 stories or 350k sqft?

 

My guess is that project(s) that size or larger are already in the works and they were able to find a state rep. to get the incentive passed.  

This would actually be really neat to see in the west end next to the fcc stadium. I don't think there is any historic board in that particular area which would object to a building that's 15 stories. 

 

I could definitely see fcc being interested in adding a 15 story luxery brand hotel that's directly adjacent to the stadium for players/coaching staff and visiting fans to utilize with ground floor bars/Clubs and restaurants. 

7 minutes ago, troeros said:

This would actually be really neat to see in the west end next to the fcc stadium. I don't think there is any historic board in that particular area which would object to a building that's 15 stories. 

 

I could definitely see fcc being interested in adding a 15 story luxery brand hotel that's directly adjacent to the stadium for players/coaching staff and visiting fans to utilize with ground floor bars/Clubs and restaurants. 

Oh I’m sure the otrcc would complain about it.

Edited January 8, 20214 yr by Ucgrad2015

If you read the Business Courier article, the tax credit is for insurance companies only.  We have a large insurance company headquartered near Lytle Park.

10 minutes ago, nicker66 said:

If you read the Business Courier article, the tax credit is for insurance companies only.  We have a large insurance company headquartered near Lytle Park.

I'm going to be honest, I read the article but didn't understand all of it. Since FCC is owned by a Lindler, and Great American is an insurance company, could they use this to fill in mixed use around FCC or was this law taylor made for Western and Southern? And to the point of FCC mixed use, it doesn't have to be 15 stories, 350,000 sqft on the ballet/tristate block for instance would only take about 6 stories. 

 

Is this all leading up to the long rumored new W&S headquarters?

The tax credit is claimed by insurance companies, but it does not mean that the is only type of company that can take advantage of the program. Developers can syndicate (sort of like selling it) to monetize value for the project, while the insurance company gets the tax benefit.

12 minutes ago, ink said:

The tax credit is claimed by insurance companies, but it does not mean that the is only type of company that can take advantage of the program. Developers can syndicate (sort of like selling it) to monetize value for the project, while the insurance company gets the tax benefit.

 

This. The idea is to get insurance companies to invest in these projects. Any project meeting the requirements laid out would be eligible.

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2021/01/15/western-southern-buys-2-downtown-buildings.html
 

Interesting purchase for Western and Southern. 

7 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2021/01/15/western-southern-buys-2-downtown-buildings.html
 

Interesting purchase for Western and Southern. 

 

Airbnb's? 

7 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2021/01/15/western-southern-buys-2-downtown-buildings.html
 

Interesting purchase for Western and Southern. 

 

They tore down the small homes on Arch St. five years ago but now they just bought two similarly small buildings.  

 

 

16 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

They tore down the small homes on Arch St. five years ago but now they just bought two similarly small buildings.  

 

 

Aren’t these protected from demolition because of the 4th St Historic District?

 

4 minutes ago, Guy23 said:

Aren’t these protected from demolition because of the 4th St Historic District?

 

 

I assume so, and there doesn't appear to be enough room there to do anything, but W-S has been at war with the historic district statue of everything near their HQ and they can't be trusted.   

I'm now a little worried after looking at the block on google maps.  As you can see, the two buildings could be demo'd to create an L-shaped building around the 4th & Broadway apartments.  And a much more substantial site could be created with the demolition of that midrise:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/317+E+5th+St,+Cincinnati,+OH+45202/@39.1011842,-84.5068622,93m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x8841b15b91f56a17:0x994195543fe0737b!8m2!3d39.1015516!4d-84.5077172

 

The very small building at 409 Broadway is owned by the Taft Theater and the parking lot between it and the Masonic Lodge is owned by the Masonic Lodge.  All of these people are in bed with one another.  The loss of this corner would be a big blow to downtown's historic character.  

 

You also have to wonder if they'd be willing to demolish part of the Masonic Lodge in order to build a new W-S office tower/garage that encompasses the surface lot at the SW corner of 4th & Sycamore.  

The Edgar Apartments (formerly Lytle Tower) at 4th & Broadway were just renovated by Rookwood Properties, so I would say there's little chance of that building being acquired and demolished. I could see W&S building a L-shaped building wrapping around it though.

I haven't kept up, what are the latest rumors regarding W&S's plans for the Lytle Park area? If I recall correctly they wanted to build a new corporate HQ tower and a residential tower in that area. They are letting the garage at 3rd & Broadway fall apart and they recently demolished the Arch Street homes right next door, so it seems like this is the site for one of those towers (it would make more sense as residential IMO). Do they plan on demolishing these buildings for their new HQ tower?

 

Both of these sites were removed from the Lytle Park Historic District in 2014:

 

^Is the spinning clock historic?  That spinning clock is the only cool thing about Western-Southern.  

 

As for an office tower, if the west side of Broadway is in fact in play, that location would bring a HQ closer to the center of downtown.  Meanwhile, the site of the garage (and clock) would have much better visibility for whatever W-S signage replaces the clock.  

 

It's of course too much to ask to see the surface lot at the SW corner of 5th and Broadway filled with high-quality infill or the 50~ parking spots between the Masonic Lodge and the very small building at 409 Broadway.  

 

Speaking of L-shaped building sites, there is of course the L-shaped parking lot that buffers the Queen City Club from the 3,000~ structured parking spots that support Queen City Square.  It's hard to imagine why these non-profit entities (Masonic Lodge, Queen City Club) have defiantly held on to their surface parking with thousands of structured parking spaces going up all around them.  High quality infill on these lots would do a ton to bolster the value of the private property in the area and the climate surrounding the W-S HQ, which is usually pretty dead.  

3 hours ago, Guy23 said:

Aren’t these protected from demolition because of the 4th St Historic District?

 

They lobbied successfully in the past to change the historic district boundaries so they could demolish what they wanted to demolish.

2 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

High quality infill on these lots would do a ton to bolster the value of the private property

If you have no desire to sell (many organizational by-laws prohibit the sale, or make it unfeasible), raising the value of the property only means increased expenses in taxes. 

1 hour ago, jwulsin said:

If you have no desire to sell (many organizational by-laws prohibit the sale, or make it unfeasible), raising the value of the property only means increased expenses in taxes. 

 

True.  But they also get themselves tax breaks whenever they want since they Own This Town.  Plus, they apparently Own Ohio if the recent act by the legislature to award them state tax breaks for office building construction are any indication. 

 

On 1/15/2021 at 1:39 PM, taestell said:

I haven't kept up, what are the latest rumors regarding W&S's plans for the Lytle Park area? If I recall correctly they wanted to build a new corporate HQ tower and a residential tower in that area. They are letting the garage at 3rd & Broadway fall apart and they recently demolished the Arch Street homes right next door, so it seems like this is the site for one of those towers (it would make more sense as residential IMO). Do they plan on demolishing these buildings for their new HQ tower?

 

Both of these sites were removed from the Lytle Park Historic District in 2014:

 

Forgive me if this was already noted, but it looks like the two buildings adjacent to The Residence Inn (the "Woodford Building," apparently) are being demolished. Got this (below) in from the city just tonight.

 

I seem to recall some grousing about these buildings being demoed but wasn't able to find anything (albeit having performed all of one google search...) 

 

Parts of downtown about to look like the teeth of a hockey player 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 20214 yr by Pdrome513

6 hours ago, Pdrome513 said:

Forgive me if this was already noted, but it looks like the two buildings adjacent to The Residence Inn (the "Woodford Building," apparently) are being demolished. Got this (below) in from the city just tonight.

 

I seem to recall some grousing about these buildings being demoed but wasn't able to find anything (albeit having performed all of one google search...) 

 

Parts of downtown about to look like the teeth of a hockey player 

 

 

 

 

Seems really random...any idea what the plan is?

Has to be something with western & southern. They basically own everything in that area. Hopefully not a parking lot for the foreseeable future. 

1 hour ago, wjh2 said:

Has to be something with western & southern. They basically own everything in that area. Hopefully not a parking lot for the foreseeable future. 

https://www.wcpo.com/money/local-business-news/dream-weaver-john-barrett-shares-his-vision-for-downtown-cincinnati
 

Heres an old article about what the CEOs possible plans were. Not sure if any of these still hold true or not. 

On 1/15/2021 at 1:39 PM, taestell said:

I haven't kept up, what are the latest rumors regarding W&S's plans for the Lytle Park area? If I recall correctly they wanted to build a new corporate HQ tower and a residential tower in that area. They are letting the garage at 3rd & Broadway fall apart and they recently demolished the Arch Street homes right next door, so it seems like this is the site for one of those towers (it would make more sense as residential IMO). Do they plan on demolishing these buildings for their new HQ tower?

 

Both of these sites were removed from the Lytle Park Historic District in 2014:

 

 

From today:

8 minutes ago, Cygnus said:

 

From today:

I feel like western and southern have been talking about a new hq for a decade now.

 

hopefully maybe this is a sign that things are inching closer.

 

that area is typically dead anyway so I can’t imagine it’s for parking and I can’t imagine the need to kick money towards costly demo if its not for something bigger planned ...at least that’s where my mindset is. 

Edited May 11, 20214 yr by Troeros2

11 minutes ago, Troeros2 said:

I feel like western and southern have been talking about a new hq for a decade now.

 

hopefully maybe this is a sign that things are inching closer.

 

that area is typically dead anyway so I can’t imagine it’s for parking and I can’t imagine the need to kick money towards costly demo if its not for something bigger planned ...at least that’s where my mindset is. 

well damn....I'm sad to see these go. Now lets replace them with something worthwhile.

I knew this has been coming for, what, nearly a decade now? But it doesn't make me any less bitter seeing these images. These were very handsome buildings that didn't deserve this fate. And especially not if there's no plan to move forward with something in this spot ASAP. I'm really hoping this is a sign that some aspect of a new HQ is moving forward on this spot. Nothing worse than teardowns being turned into long-vacant lots. And right now, the east and west sides of Downtown are going to be left with tow large gaps in the fabric, both of which seem questionable that they'll be filled anytime soon (other being the Millennium space).

i always remember article's saying, they would need to build a new garage before any new HQ would be built. 

8 hours ago, jmicha said:

I knew this has been coming for, what, nearly a decade now? But it doesn't make me any less bitter seeing these images. These were very handsome buildings that didn't deserve this fate. And especially not if there's no plan to move forward with something in this spot ASAP. I'm really hoping this is a sign that some aspect of a new HQ is moving forward on this spot. Nothing worse than teardowns being turned into long-vacant lots. And right now, the east and west sides of Downtown are going to be left with tow large gaps in the fabric, both of which seem questionable that they'll be filled anytime soon (other being the Millennium space).

****I NEED TO RESEARCH THE BELOW MORE*****

 

One of those buildings is literally where the McGuffey readers were published - a fact I only learned because when I was in the coop program in UC I interviewed at a company in that building.  Seeing that go is disgusting - such a big part of American history completely erased, and in classic Cincinnati fashion almost no one knew it was a thing...

Edited May 12, 20214 yr by neilworms

1 hour ago, neilworms said:

One of those buildings is literally where the McGuffey readers were published - a fact I only learned because when I was in the coop program in UC I interviewed at a company in that building.  Seeing that go is disgusting - such a big part of American history completely erased, and in classic Cincinnati fashion almost no one knew it was a thing...

Being from Europe I sort of laugh what’s considered historic in America. 
 

A building in my city that’s 100 year old isn’t even classified as historic just labeled as an older building . Most buildings in my city in our old town are 300 to 600 years old if not older.

 

Not saying that these buildings shouldn’t have been saved, but their is a strange obsession with historic preservation with what is classified as historic...in Europe it’s a totally different ball game.

 

 

 

 

My qualification has always been, is it a well designed example of its category of architecture, and if yes, keep it. Obviously there are always exceptions to this rule. But overall, smarter adaptive reuse of older structures, strategic new development replacing poor examples of architecture from the past, and incorporation of new additions onto older structures to blend new and old makes for a much nicer urban environment.

 

Structures like this aren't replicated in a city like Cincinnati anymore and therefore should have remained. It has nothing to do in my mind with age or whether or not you can classify them as "historic." it has to do with whether or not their loss will lessen the quality of the built environment. And given Western Southern's history, I doubt whatever replaces them will feel as nice as a pedestrian or fit into the area as well as these did. I bet at best we'll get a corporate lobby. The rest will be parking levels, blank walls, and lifeless facades.

Sucks that there’s not any parking lots in downtown that are big enough for a new headquarters.....oh wait. 

3 hours ago, neilworms said:

One of those buildings is literally where the McGuffey readers were published - a fact I only learned because when I was in the coop program in UC I interviewed at a company in that building.  Seeing that go is disgusting - such a big part of American history completely erased, and in classic Cincinnati fashion almost no one knew it was a thing...

 

Which building?  I assume not the Woodford building.  According to the Business Courier story, the Woodford building was built in 1902.   The original McGuffey readers were first published in 1836, and variously updated until 1901 (the year before the Woodford building was built).   I guess it could have been the publishing location for the final versions.  

 

The two-story building looks even newer to my eyes, but I haven't seen anything listing the date.  

4 hours ago, jdm00 said:

 

Which building?  I assume not the Woodford building.  According to the Business Courier story, the Woodford building was built in 1902.   The original McGuffey readers were first published in 1836, and variously updated until 1901 (the year before the Woodford building was built).   I guess it could have been the publishing location for the final versions.  

 

The two-story building looks even newer to my eyes, but I haven't seen anything listing the date.  

I remember seeing a bunch of information in the lobby of that building about the McGuffey readers.  I did some googling and I also saw an old pamphlet noting a main street address.  Perhaps I need to do a bit more research on this.

9 hours ago, TheCOV said:

well damn....I'm sad to see these go. Now lets replace them with something worthwhile.

More than a little bit worried about what that means, by Western and Southern standards. Queen City Square is my least favorite downtown building.

9 hours ago, neilworms said:

I remember seeing a bunch of information in the lobby of that building about the McGuffey readers.  I did some googling and I also saw an old pamphlet noting a main street address.  Perhaps I need to do a bit more research on this.

 

I think you may be thinking of the American Book Building, which is on Pike Street (in the general area, but not either of these buildings).  I think the American Book Building was renovated and has stable office clients.  

 

http://wikimapia.org/19331491/American-Book-Binding-Building

 

21 hours ago, TheCOV said:

well damn....I'm sad to see these go. Now lets replace them with something worthwhile.

 

The article in the BizCourier says they have no immediate plans and that it will be used as green space. At the same time, maybe they are being coy. Want there some bill passed last year in Ohio that gave insurance companies credits for building a skyscraper?

4 hours ago, jdm00 said:

 

I think you may be thinking of the American Book Building, which is on Pike Street (in the general area, but not either of these buildings).  I think the American Book Building was renovated and has stable office clients.  

 

http://wikimapia.org/19331491/American-Book-Binding-Building

 

Yeah that's it!  I see why I got confused, that whole area of town is a bit out of the way from where people normally go.   Still no excuse though to remove a perfectly solidly built building particularly without a plan.

1 hour ago, Rabbit Hash said:

 

The article in the BizCourier says they have no immediate plans and that it will be used as green space. At the same time, maybe they are being coy. Want there some bill passed last year in Ohio that gave insurance companies credits for building a skyscraper?

Yes O.R.C. 122.09. Not necessarily a skyscraper but a "transformational" project that's at least 15 stories OR 350,000sqft. The only stipulation in ORC 122.09 that doesn't make sense to me is point 8; "Evidence that the project will not be completed unless the applicant receives the credit." how does someone with as much cash as Western & Southern or Eagle realty prove that they can't afford something without a tax break? 

 

22 minutes ago, ucgrady said:

Yes O.R.C. 122.09. Not necessarily a skyscraper but a "transformational" project that's at least 15 stories OR 350,000sqft. The only stipulation in ORC 122.09 that doesn't make sense to me is point 8; "Evidence that the project will not be completed unless the applicant receives the credit." how does someone with as much cash as Western & Southern or Eagle realty prove that they can't afford something without a tax break? 

 

 

Creative accounting

They've had a fully designed 800' tower planned for that site for a couple years. Not sure why they're being coy unless it is related to the tax credit that they clearly created for themselves.  

Edited May 13, 20214 yr by nicker66

34 minutes ago, nicker66 said:

They've had a fully designed 800' tower planned for that site for a couple years. Not sure why they're being coy unless it is related to the tax credit that they clearly created for themselves.  

That would be neat..interestingly that would make it the 80th tallest building in the US at that height. 
 

42 minutes ago, nicker66 said:

They've had a fully designed 800' tower planned for that site for a couple years. Not sure why they're being coy unless it is related to the tax credit that they clearly created for themselves.  

But I thought that building was going to a different parcel, namely the garage on 3rd Street? Those buildings seem like they are too small of a parcel for an 800' building. Plus, I cant see much high end office towers being built and financed in the current environment with more an more permanently working from home. Plus aren't they going to build the building at the Banks later this year? Seems like too much office space for the market if they add an 800' tower.