This is a real wasted opportunity. The last thing this part of the CBD needs is more office space. What is sorely needed, however, is more residential...and lots of it.

 

The real beauty about this property is that it is one of maybe three sites in the downtown area that is well-suited for a high-rise residential tower.

• 2nd & Walnut is earmarked for an office tower at The Banks.
  
• Who knows what will happen at Fountain Place.
  
• NW corner of 7th & Vine could go residential high-rise.
  
• 4th & Plum will only take midrise at best due to historic district.
  
• Rest of The Banks will be low to midrise residential offerings.
  
• OTR will only ever be lowrise buildings.
  
• The lots near City Hall and the Courthouse also will probably never be high-rise development sites.

So, what Cincinnati has seemingly done is take up one of only a few select locations for a residential high-rise for an office tower that could have gone in several other locations.

 

dunnhumbyUSA's new headquarters would have seem much better at The Banks where it would have helped either pay down the development debt on phase one, or help finance phase two. This would have also helped pump money into those county-owned garages, and in turn helped pay down the stadium debt that is crippling Hamilton County.

 

There are still plenty of vacant parcels that could support high-rise residential:

 

- St. Xavier Park area (Sycamore both north and south of Seventh and extending north of Seventh all the way to Main)

- NE corner of Seventh and Vine and half of the entire block east of Vine

- NW corner of Sixth and Sycamore (both the vacant lot and the lot that is currently wasted on the single-story Red Fox diner)

- mid-block east side of Main between Sixth and Seventh (infill could be larger part of massive vacant lot next to St. X)

- SW corner of Ninth and Sycamore directly north of the Power Building (though this would be across the intersection from the jail)

- SE corner of Walnut and Eighth

- the vacant land on Eighth St. that the old Blue Wisp was on

- NW corner of Race and Garfield Place

- mass vacant land between One Lytle Place and the PP bridge on both sides of the street (originally slated for condo high-rises but scuttled due to the economy)

- perhaps even some decent-sized infill on the SW corner of Fifth and Broadway

 

Not to mention the mass amounts of vacant space at and near the Court/Elm/Central area. And I wouldn't count out residential being at least part of this Fifth & Race development either.

 

And why can't the lots near the courthouse and especially City Hall ever be high-rise residential? What's the roadblock?

 

 

Couldn't agree more.  While I think we all agree that downtown could use more housing options and particularly a high rise or two, there are plenty of available lots to build on; plenty!!!!  Not to mention the rennovation of some exisiting buildings.  OBviously the Reserve is a great example of such a possibility; Enquirer building anyone?

Having 50-60 thousand square foot floors is huge, but if that's what they want then cool.  I personally didn't like it when the company I used to work for in Florida went from an office tower into two 65 thousand square foot floors.  No longer were the many departments conveniently located via a quick ride on the elevators.  But I’ll say it again, let them build what works for them, they know what works for their business. 

 

I’m sure the space will be used to its fullest.  I just hope that the space above the DH offices is utilized to its full potential because of this being in the heart of the city. 

 

I would think that DunnhumbyUSA would want its marquee on the top of a tower to be part of the skyline.  If the building sits to low then this type of visibility will not be possible.  We will eventually find out when the plans come out.

Having 50-60 thousand square foot floors is huge, but if that's what they want then cool.  I personally didn't like it when the company I used to work for in Florida went from an office tower into two 65 thousand square foot floors.  No longer were the many departments conveniently located via a quick ride on the elevators.  But I’ll say it again, let them build what works for them, they know what works for their business. 

 

I’m sure the space will be used to its fullest.  I just hope that the space above the DH offices is utilized to its full potential because of this being in the heart of the city. 

 

I would think that DunnhumbyUSA would want its marquee on the top of a tower to be part of the skyline.  If the building sits to low then this type of visibility will not be possible.  We will eventually find out when the plans come out.

 

Well, it's not like DH is in an office tower now. Far from it. With the street-level retail and parking, their new offices will surely be higher than the highest floor they have now.

OCtoCincy- where have you read 40,000 sqft per floor?  QCS is not even 40,000 sqft per floor...  and the sites Dunhumby itself has mentioned do not logically support a floorplate that size.

 

^ the Enquirer article that announced the deal.

 

And QCS has never been considered large in terms of SF per floor. The P&G office building (not the towers) has almost twice the Square footage per flood as QCS.

 

Their current site is roughly 35,000 SF per floor. They clearly prefer large open floor plans.

I heard on the radio this morning that Dahoney addressed council on the issue, and stated that Retail AND Residential are planned to be components in the development.  No mention to what extent, but it seems city leaders do indeed understand the importance of the site and mixed use is the goal.

^Yes and it is confirmed in the Business Courier.

^^ It is not confirmed that there WOULD be residential included in the plan. It cleary states that it COULD be part of the plan. The city can suggest whatever they want, but it is up the the owner of the building (DunnhumbyUSA). I just want to make sure the facts as of now are clear.

DunnHumby isn't going to own the building. They'll own their floors. 3CDC is going to be the developer, so it'll be up to them. And with 3CDC's track record, it'll will more than likely include residential.

I am going to point back to the facts, where it has been stated that DunnHumby will own their building and 3CDC will own the garage and any retail surrounding the structure, anything beyond that is speculation. But plans can change. I just don’t see DunnHumby wanting to be sandwiched between floors or not being the main focal point of the building. 3CDC can be the developer all they want, with no DunnHumby there is no project, therefore it is not up to 3CDC, so if DunnHumby does not approve the plans, the project will not go forward.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the new dunnhumby USA headquarters will be a 1000 footer.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the new dunnhumby USA headquarters will be a 1000 footer.

 

They're already calling it the Dunnhumby Khalifa.

This is a real wasted opportunity. The last thing this part of the CBD needs is more office space. What is sorely needed, however, is more residential...and lots of it.

 

The real beauty about this property is that it is one of maybe three sites in the downtown area that is well-suited for a high-rise residential tower.

• 2nd & Walnut is earmarked for an office tower at The Banks.
  
• Who knows what will happen at Fountain Place.
  
• NW corner of 7th & Vine could go residential high-rise.
  
• 4th & Plum will only take midrise at best due to historic district.
  
• Rest of The Banks will be low to midrise residential offerings.
  
• OTR will only ever be lowrise buildings.
  
• The lots near City Hall and the Courthouse also will probably never be high-rise development sites.

So, what Cincinnati has seemingly done is take up one of only a few select locations for a residential high-rise for an office tower that could have gone in several other locations.

 

dunnhumbyUSA's new headquarters would have seem much better at The Banks where it would have helped either pay down the development debt on phase one, or help finance phase two. This would have also helped pump money into those county-owned garages, and in turn helped pay down the stadium debt that is crippling Hamilton County.

 

There are still plenty of vacant parcels that could support high-rise residential:

 

- St. Xavier Park area (Sycamore both north and south of Seventh and extending north of Seventh all the way to Main)

- NE corner of Seventh and Vine and half of the entire block east of Vine

- NW corner of Sixth and Sycamore (both the vacant lot and the lot that is currently wasted on the single-story Red Fox diner)

- mid-block east side of Main between Sixth and Seventh (infill could be larger part of massive vacant lot next to St. X)

- SW corner of Ninth and Sycamore directly north of the Power Building (though this would be across the intersection from the jail)

- SE corner of Walnut and Eighth

- the vacant land on Eighth St. that the old Blue Wisp was on

- NW corner of Race and Garfield Place

- mass vacant land between One Lytle Place and the PP bridge on both sides of the street (originally slated for condo high-rises but scuttled due to the economy)

- perhaps even some decent-sized infill on the SW corner of Fifth and Broadway

 

Not to mention the mass amounts of vacant space at and near the Court/Elm/Central area. And I wouldn't count out residential being at least part of this Fifth & Race development either.

 

And why can't the lots near the courthouse and especially City Hall ever be high-rise residential? What's the roadblock?

 

 

Couldn't agree more.  While I think we all agree that downtown could use more housing options and particularly a high rise or two, there are plenty of available lots to build on; plenty!!!!  Not to mention the rennovation of some exisiting buildings.  OBviously the Reserve is a great example of such a possibility; Enquirer building anyone?

 

I agree with both of you that there are lots of potential sites on which to build residential, but of the sites we are all identifying very few are going to ever see a building over 10 floors built on them.

 

Yes, building on ALL of those sites would add a thousand or two thousand residents to downtown. But in my opinion, there needs to be even more residents than that if Cincinnati really wants a vibrant, 24-hour center city. Right now there is just very little in terms of residential properties provided in the CBD. I'm glad that residential may in fact be a component of this site, but even more is needed. I hope 3CDC gets it right.

I am going to point back to the facts, where it has been stated that DunnHumby will own their building and 3CDC will own the garage and any retail surrounding the structure, anything beyond that is speculation. But plans can change. I just don’t see DunnHumby wanting to be sandwiched between floors or not being the main focal point of the building. 3CDC can be the developer all they want, with no DunnHumby there is no project, therefore it is not up to 3CDC, so if DunnHumby does not approve the plans, the project will not go forward.

 

 

"Dunnhumby would own its offices. Non-profit developer Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) would own and operate the rest. " -Enquirer.

 

That does NOT say Dunnhumby owns the entire building and that 3CDC & the City (Who owns the land and will likely be providing major financing) would have no say.

 

It's Definitley not a certainty that there will be residential, but it's not solely Dunnhumby's decision at all.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the new dunnhumby USA headquarters will be a 1000 footer.

 

They're already calling it the Dunnhumby Khalifa.

 

LOL

I am going to point back to the facts, where it has been stated that DunnHumby will own their building and 3CDC will own the garage and any retail surrounding the structure, anything beyond that is speculation. But plans can change. I just don’t see DunnHumby wanting to be sandwiched between floors or not being the main focal point of the building. 3CDC can be the developer all they want, with no DunnHumby there is no project, therefore it is not up to 3CDC, so if DunnHumby does not approve the plans, the project will not go forward.

 

 

"Dunnhumby would own its offices. Non-profit developer Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) would own and operate the rest. " -Enquirer.

 

That does NOT say Dunnhumby owns the entire building and that 3CDC & the City (Who owns the land and will likely be providing major financing) would have no say.

 

It's Definitley not a certainty that there will be residential, but it's not solely Dunnhumby's decision at all.

 

DunnhumbyUSA is in the final stages of dealmaking to build 250,000 square feet of offices above a parking and retail structure. Dunnhumby would own its offices. Non-profit developer Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) would own and operate the rest. - the entire Enquirer quote

 

 

key words: "250,000 square feet of offices above a parking and retail structure" and "3CDC would own and operate the rest" the rest being the "parking and retail structure"  it does not say:  "parking, retail, and the additional floors of residential"

 

I am just going by the facts, i'm not trying to say someone is wrong or there is no chance of residential.

 

Just that stating it has been "confirmed" that there will be residential, is false or to state "3CDC is going to be the developer, so it'll be up to them" is also false. Because it is not up to 3CDC, DunnHumby is the customer to 3CDC not the other way around. Sure 3CDC will provide input, suggestions, and ideas but in the end DunnHumby will get what they want, not what 3CDC wants soley because they are the "developer".

 

 

>there needs to be even more residents than that

 

It should be pointed out that even the all-residential sections of Manhattan (upper west, east, and harlem), you can walk around at 3am and still not see anybody.  The 24-hour sections visitors are familiar with in Manhattan are generally south of Central Park and concetrated around entertainment.  This is actually the sot of environment downtown and OTR are, so it probably won't take forests of 16-floor public housing blocks to support late night businesses. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It should be pointed out that even the all-residential sections of Manhattan (upper west, east, and harlem), you can walk around at 3am and still not see anybody.  The 24-hour sections visitors are familiar with in Manhattan are generally south of Central Park and concetrated around entertainment.  This is actually the sot of environment downtown and OTR are, so it probably won't take forests of 16-floor public housing blocks to support late night businesses.

 

These areas of New York have far greater amounts of residential space than does the CBD. Yes OTR has lots, but the CBD does not. If you want to make the CBD self-supporting in terms of all the retail currently there, and the retail desired (i.e. grocery store, movie theater, clothing shops), then you are going to need a lot more residential space. Converting historic office buildings would go a long way, but it won't get you all the way there.

 

With that said, I'm not advocating a "forest of 16-floor housing blocks." What I'm advocating is the thoughtful incorporation of a few high-rise residential towers. These towers will supply a large amount of new residents and also introduce a new housing product to downtown. Believe it or not, not everyone has the desire to live in a restored 19th century building.

It should be pointed out that even the all-residential sections of Manhattan (upper west, east, and harlem), you can walk around at 3am and still not see anybody.  The 24-hour sections visitors are familiar with in Manhattan are generally south of Central Park and concetrated around entertainment.  This is actually the sot of environment downtown and OTR are, so it probably won't take forests of 16-floor public housing blocks to support late night businesses.

 

These areas of New York have far greater amounts of residential space than does the CBD. Yes OTR has lots, but the CBD does not. If you want to make the CBD self-supporting in terms of all the retail currently there, and the retail desired (i.e. grocery store, movie theater, clothing shops), then you are going to need a lot more residential space. Converting historic office buildings would go a long way, but it won't get you all the way there.

 

With that said, I'm not advocating a "forest of 16-floor housing blocks." What I'm advocating is the thoughtful incorporation of a few high-rise residential towers. These towers will supply a large amount of new residents and also introduce a new housing product to downtown. Believe it or not, not everyone has the desire to live in a restored 19th century building.

 

I really think AFFORDABLE( 100k to 300K on the Higher side) condos in the CBD would be great too with reasonable HOA fees ($100 to $250 a month). A lot of people don't like or want to rent and would like to own but can't afford these 600K+ units and $500 to $1,000 HOA fees.

I really think AFFORDABLE( 100k to 300K on the Higher side) condos in the CBD would be great too with reasonable HOA fees ($100 to $250 a month). A lot of people don't like or want to rent and would like to own but can't afford these 600K+ units and $500 to $1,000 HOA fees.

 

Totally agree with this.  When I was looking to buy, there was very little in this price range downtown.  And since I don't happen to work downtown, the increased expense wouldn't even be offset by a lack of commute for me.  The CBD could really use some affordable condos for YPs, along with more apartments.

But I doubt any bank is going to finance a high rise condo tower that isn't 450-700,000 units.

But who's buying $450k+ condos in the current market?

Heck, we can't even sell the existing condos in downtown at the $300k range, or $500k units in Mt. Adams!

 

I was photographing some units recently for a client, and the units were for sale for about $650k, with a HOA of $1,200 a month. They hadn't sold in 3 years. In fact, none of the units had sold, and all had lease options of about $1,600 a month - still, with no takers. These were in downtown, and units at The Banks were being snatched up very quickly at this time.

 

There is a glut of high end condos, with outrageous "HOA" fees. There are still plenty of unsold units in OTR. The ones above Park+Vine (Belmain, IIRC) were all condos that never sold until they were converted into rentals that were snatched in a matter of months.

Heck, we can't even sell the existing condos in downtown at the $300k range, or $500k units in Mt. Adams!

 

I was photographing some units recently for a client, and the units were for sale for about $650k, with a HOA of $1,200 a month. They hadn't sold in 3 years. In fact, none of the units had sold, and all had lease options of about $1,600 a month - still, with no takers. These were in downtown, and units at The Banks were being snatched up very quickly at this time.

 

There is a glut of high end condos, with outrageous "HOA" fees. There are still plenty of unsold units in OTR. The ones above Park+Vine (Belmain, IIRC) were all condos that never sold until they were converted into rentals that were snatched in a matter of months.

 

Agreed, hence the affordable condos comment.

I agree that much of the macro housing market is flooded with owner-occupied units, but where is the glut of available condos downtown?

I wouldn't concentrate it to just downtown. There were 5 projects that I recently shot photos of, and 2 of them were completely empty. Another, the Palisades, hasn't been doing all that well in terms of units sold, and it was recently profiled in the Enquirer (with a great photo of my realtor that sold me my house!). The other two were mostly vacant. Four out of the five had been on the market for at least 2 years.

 

OTR has been doing better - I think the last status report from OTR had about 82% of the condo units sold that were built in Phases 1 - 4, which is good, and the ones that are still available are generally the most expensive units in a particular development. Not that much of a shock. But some, like the Belmain, were in the $125k+ range, and just did not sell because they were grossly overpriced despite its location at 12th and Main. When those became rentals for modest prices, they were snatched up quickly.

 

I wouldn't say it is a huge glut - it's not as if a tower is completely empty, like some are in Miami. But I just don't see a demand right now - anywhere, for $400k+ units in a tower. I'd rather see apartments, where there is proven demand right now. I mean, we are nearing 100% occupancy for apartments in downtown and OTR! :)

Great news on this!  I was out of town for a week with no computer access so I was really surprised.  As far as the development I agree/believe that Dunnhumby will own their portion of the site through a condominium style ownership which is done quite often.  I also agree that with 3CDC's record, the building will include the parking, residential and possibly additional office.  I don't know that speculative, large scale Class A office space is in 3CDC's wheelhouse, so if there is a few additional floors I wouldn't be surprised, but I wouldn't expect much either.  As far as underground parking I would expect little to none as the economics just aren't there unless someone (likely the City) would pony up the cash just to have it benefit downtown as a loss leader.

^ underground parking is certainly part of the process. 3CDC's original site study said it was a necessity.

I love the fact this spot has been taken care of.  Its almost like a slap in the face for Eagle Realty because they had so many chances to develop that land and 3CDC takes over.  Almost instantly they got something done.  It just goes to show where certain priorities are within businesses.  Of course I could be wrong but 3CDC was always the best choice.

^ underground parking is certainly part of the process. 3CDC's original site study said it was a necessity.

 

I wasn't saying there won't be any, I was just noting the fact that it is a money loser and no for-profit developer would put in any if they had a choice to build it above ground.  The Macy's/Fountain Square West development is a perfect example.  That site would have been a great spot for a large amount of underground parking for the betterment of downtown as a whole, but the economics weren't there to make it work and the City couldn't afford to pony up the cash to make it happen, so the development has a small amount of underground parking, only about 150 spaces or so I believe.

I just ran across this photo I took of a parking garage in Atlanta in 1998 or 1999.  No, I doubt we are going to be met with a new garage this hideous:

^Cite one example where a new office development in downtown Cincinnati has produced a garage that looks anything like that?

I took a photo of it because I thought the idea to give a parking garage a Las Vegas-type neo-classic facade was simply unbelievable.  No, we don't have anything that nutty here, but I don't think designers should be trying to hide parking garages either, like what happened with the QCS II lobby/garage facing 4th.  The average person might not notice the garage, but intelligent people will, and the city is trying to recruit intelligent people, not average people. 

 

A moment of silence for our old friend:

Not sure that people realize building a condo tower at this location with all parking below grade and units under 300K is so cost prohibitive it would be laughed out of the room.  I know this board is full of dreamers but at some point you have to remember things cost money.  The older office buildings need to be converted before anyone will even propose something like that.

 

I was just reading the Business Courier's top 25 office buildings list and realized that  dunnhumby's space requirements will most likely require their space to span the entire block.  They want floor plates similar to P&G's central building which spans the entire block between Sycamore and Broadway.  Not sure what you can combine with that other than more office.

 

I predict parking half below and half above grade, hidden by first floor retail.  Then maybe a tower of 10-12 floors making it maybe 18 stories above grade.  Nothing special.  3CDC might keep hope alive by adding the supports for a future tower similar to what's on top of Fountain Place but we see how that has worked out. (Fifth Third Bank owns the air rights to Fountain Place)

They should build it with plans to expand their own space vertically, they have already proven they can expand quickly

and allowing future expansion will prevent them from having to move again in 5-10 years. It has been done successfully, just look at the Blue Cross Blue Shield building in Chicago.

I took a photo of it because I thought the idea to give a parking garage a Las Vegas-type neo-classic facade was simply unbelievable.  No, we don't have anything that nutty here, but I don't think designers should be trying to hide parking garages either, like what happened with the QCS II lobby/garage facing 4th.  The average person might not notice the garage, but intelligent people will, and the city is trying to recruit intelligent people, not average people. 

 

A moment of silence for our old friend:

 

Agreed.  There are many ways to conceal a parking structure within a tower.  Depending on its scale, it may not be economical to address it exactly as they did with Broadway Tower, but I guarantee integrating the parking portion will be a priority in this location.

 

I was just reading the Business Courier's top 25 office buildings list and realized that  dunnhumby's space requirements will most likely require their space to span the entire block.  They want floor plates similar to P&G's central building which spans the entire block between Sycamore and Broadway.  Not sure what you can combine with that other than more office.

 

There is no reason they cannot locate residential entirely above what is sure to be block-long office plates. 

The reason why I don't buy this whole large floor plates business is because elevator shafts and utilities must be in the center of the space somewhere, unless they push all that against the back wall, which would be pretty unusual (The Carew Tower, oddly enough, has this situation).  So if there is a residential tower, it will have its own elevator shafts that take up space in the middle of these large floor plates, aside from the elevators necessary for the office space.

 

I worked in a huge suburban office building that was longer than this one, and the elevator shafts and bathrooms had the effect of totally blocking the opposite side of the floor.  I didn't know the names of anyone over there, or if they even had names.  That's why I'm not buying this open floors talk, unless they are in fact planning to push all utilities against the west wall. 

 

Then there is the whole matter of pillars.  Again, it seems cost prohibitive to create floors of office space measuring 200x400 feet without rows of pillars.  Has Dunhumby determined the pillar ratio at which creativity becomes stifled?

 

I must say that I feel better about this since they are adding a residential component....would still like to see more height, but I understand they are looking for specific design elements.  Hopefully Kasich does not try to weasel in on this expansion....

Every time I think of massive floorplate new construction I think of this BOFA campus in uptown Charlotte. That's at least a 40,000 SF floorplate in that big piece, and probably a lot more. How do I know? Look at the big square parking garage on the east end, it's about 360x360, or over 100,000 SF. And the big office building is about half that.

 

Also notice that the big parking garage is lined with about 40' deep of condos on the south side. So, in many respects, these are the kinds of dimensions and "feel" that the 5th and Race site could provide.

 

Charlotte: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=bank+of+america+campus+charlotte+east&ll=35.23476,-80.850744&spn=0.002723,0.004128&fb=1&gl=us&hq=bank+of+america+campus+charlotte+east&cid=0,0,5192308135396348751&t=h&z=19

 

Cincinnati: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=cincinnati&ll=39.101539,-84.514901&spn=0.00183,0.004128&hnear=Cincinnati,+Hamilton,+Ohio&gl=us&t=h&z=19

I must say that I feel better about this since they are adding a residential component....would still like to see more height, but I understand they are looking for specific design elements.  Hopefully Kasich does not try to weasel in on this expansion....

 

What makes you so sure there is a residential componet?

Documents reveal dunnhumby mid-rise, possible downtown Kroger

 

 

DOWNTOWN — The city of Cincinnati has opened its books on a pending deal that’s likely to bring 1,000 dunnhumbyUSA workers, 40,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space and up to 1,000 parking spaces to the long-anticipated Fifth and Race development.

 

It could also bring the central business district its first Kroger grocery store and up to 130 residential units.

 

City documents provided to the Enquirer reveal a plan for a mid-rise building for the consumer insights firm at Fifth and Race, and at Sixth and Race, residential units atop an above-ground parking garage. The two buildings would sit above underground parking and be connected by street-level retail. And one document shows a potential smaller-format test grocery store for Kroger.

 

More below:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120217/BIZ/302180006/Documents-reveal-dunnhumby-mid-rise-possible-downtown-Kroger?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

oh maaaannnn. 

Thanks for the link, I missed this when browsing news this morning.

 

Kroger spokesman Keith Dailey said discussions with developer Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) are preliminary and no determinations have been made. But in past years, the national grocer has quashed any talk of opening a downtown store. Not enough shoppers and no proper real estate, the company has said.

 

I wonder if this speaks favorably of the changing demographics downtown?

 

Personally I think it says that Kroger is willing to consider where in past years they weren't even gonna talk about the notion.

They'd better find their "residential developer" asap!  Im going to be extremely disappointed if they dont pull it off.   

Thanks for the link, I missed this when browsing news this morning.

 

Kroger spokesman Keith Dailey said discussions with developer Cincinnati Center City Development Corporation (3CDC) are preliminary and no determinations have been made. But in past years, the national grocer has quashed any talk of opening a downtown store. Not enough shoppers and no proper real estate, the company has said.

 

I wonder if this speaks favorably of the changing demographics downtown?

 

Personally I think it says that Kroger is willing to consider where in past years they weren't even gonna talk about the notion.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this is something dunnhumby was pushing for.  Kroger is a part owner and important client, and the two companies have incredibly close ties.  I know absolutely nothing beyond that, but if dunnhumby thinks they can attract better talent by having residential and a grocery, along with a vibrant street space, I could see Kroger being willing to accomodate that.

There's still going to be a highrise above it correct?

They'd better find their "residential developer" asap!  Im going to be extremely disappointed if they dont pull it off.   

 

Yep! The relevant part of the article:

The residential component would only happen if a developer is identified soon, Leeper said. He doesn’t want construction still under way once dunnhumbyUSA moves in, which is scheduled for 2014.

 

“Everyone would like to do residential development there, but ideally, we construct simultaneously,” Leeper said. “I don’t want to do residential at the expense of dunnhumbyUSA.”

There's still going to be a highrise above it correct?

 

It almost sounds like the plan is to have two buildings on top of the parking garage surrounded by retail. but I could be wrong, the article is confusing in that aspect. Edit: Not sure how tall they would be as "mid rise"

 

"City documents provided to the Enquirer reveal a plan for a mid-rise building for the consumer insights firm at Fifth and Race, and at Sixth and Race, residential units atop an above-ground parking garage. The two buildings would sit above underground parking and be connected by street-level retail."

Exciting times. The addition of a Kroger will signify that downtown is a work-play-live destination. These decisions are not easy - Dayton once had a downtown Kroger, and Columbus has two urban Krogers, so the idea of an urban Kroger isn't exactly new. But with the addition of The Banks, the new apartments coming online along 4th, and the revitalization of OTR, a central Kroger that offers a variety of products will be great. It appears that it will be a scaled down version of a typical store, which is great - no one needs a Marketplace down there, but one that sells the basics, with fresh foods and "take home" meals, will be good.

I wouldn't put too much stock in residential not happening if it doesn't happen before 2014.  It would be incredibly short sighted not to at least build the platform for future residential development after Dunnhumby is moved in and settled, and 3CDC seems to be a smart group.  In a perfect world, yes it would be best for all the construction to take place simultaneously, but it is certainly not a must in my opinion.