Who is this Eichelbaum character?  He seems to have an agenda, and not a good one.  His organization, Marketing Developments Inc., sounds so vague and faceless that it has to be nefarious.

 

He is actually a great guy and very good at what he does.  He has been heavily involved in promoting downtown for the last 20 years or so.  MDI is very well thought of in retail circles and apparently he makes a pretty good living at it. (my 2 cents for what it is worth)

I never said he was great person, I said he appears to have a lot of knowledge when it comes to development and retail. Google his name and you will see he seems to still be 'current' in today's market.

Wal-Mart is 'current' in today's market as well...what's your point!?!?  I'm not doubting that he is an intelligent man, but some positive press and a successful business model does not necessarily equate to anything.

Actually I not sure what you point was, you discredit the guy because he made comments you didn't agree with or like? My response was to LinclonKennedy that it appears this guy and his company is not some no name organization. Weather or not he has a person agenda I don't know.

I actually never discredited him...all I did was suggest to not be so quick with the praise.  Like I said...everyone sang Robert Moses' praise for a while, but that hasn't lasted.  No one is the be all, end all authority on these types of things.  It's just that the first person to throw doubts in the air you get behind and immediately sing his praises.  But anyone else who remains confident is suspect to you.

 

Here is a recap of my posts...please tell me where I discredited him:

 

I would assume that they are asking for higher densities so that they can make it work financially to offer more affordable units...units that may be geared towards YPs and other middle-class individuals.  This is the market that the development needs to tap in order to be successful in the residential component (that's my humble opinion).

 

You know at a point in time Robert Moses had many gleaming articles written about him and about how great he was.  You may still find some today that argue he was great for NYC and its boroughs, but I would venture to say that you would find many more differing views today.

 

Greatness is not something that can be judged in the present day...it is something that history will decide.

 

Wal-Mart is 'current' in today's market as well...what's your point!?!?  I'm not doubting that he is an intelligent man, but some positive press and a successful business model does not necessarily equate to anything.

Look, this conversation is not going to go anywhere, I was just making a comment that this guy apparently has some notable knowledge in the field he was commenting on. Weather I or you or anyone agrees or disagrees with what he had to say is a personal opinion and is not worth arguing about.

^Well put...

 

While I don't know if ye has an 'agenda' this guy is clearly not clueless on development and retail. He might just know something most on UrbanOhio don't.

^Well put...

 

While I don't know if ye has an 'agenda' this guy is clearly not clueless on development and retail. He might just know something most on UrbanOhio don't.

 

I won't comment on this type of conversation.

Not to belabor the point, but rather just to throw this out there...

 

He's not really commenting directly on something he knows a lot about. He's commenting on the connection between downtown and the river, land use, and density. He's an expert on retail development.

 

His beef seems to be with the higher building heights. My first impression is that he's worried his view from his modest office at 4th and Plum will be blocked.

 

This comment is only tangential and has nothing to do with Eichelbaum's capabilities, but for a marketing company they sure have a terrible looking website:

http://www.marketingdevelopments.com/home.html

I've seen worse.

 

There is a company here in Lexington completing some high-profile development projects, including some restorations. Their billboards advertise their web-site, but for all intents and purposes, its nothing more than a placeholder. And an ugly one at that.

 

Looks can be deceiving :)

^Yes, hopefully the reign of the sunbelt is almost at an end.

 

Nope, sorry. Not just yet. I think you will see northern cities stabilize. But sunbelt cities have a good generation of growth left. Orlando, where I live currently, is experiencing crushing growth. This is the kind of city where growth isn't driven by industry, it *is* the industry.

 

The problem with Cincinnati isn't that it's low growth or low demand. Jesus. You all back home really don't want the kind of growth Orlando has. The American civilization does not have the tools to accommodate it in a responsible way. It's awful. Case in point: We made a really great growth plan for part of a county that was based on a connected regional street network, new urbanist principles, and good green space preservation. It is now collapsing under A) population projections that are double what even our densest villages can handle and B) private land ownership issues.

 

Anyhow, the problem isn't that Cincinnati doesn't have the demand for XYZ. It's the the financial and development industries don't have the incremental format for matching their rate of development with a low rate of growth. Like a cheap whore, they want to be in, out and over, usually with a return-on-investment of less than 10 years. If you unravel the financial yarn ball, it is getting paid for, ultimately, by a bunch of pension funds, and those investors, who may end up being your teacher or your grandma, want a certain rate of return on their retirement plan.

 

That's why you don't really see a "medium" pace of development in an American city right now. There's either little guys like Middle Earth, or it's a massive condo tower or project like The Banks. That middle ground financial model just doesn't exist very often.

 

Migration patterns are starting to indicate that the Baby Boom generation in the north won't retire to the sunbelt like the generation before them. So that's one thing going for the North. Another isn't warming, it's water. Water scarcity will limit growth in the sunbelt long before warming does. Another thing that isn't talked about much is local backlash. Floridians are so clusterfucked over growth and hurricane insurance that there are some very, very severe referendums coming up that could more or less paralyze the development industry.

 

Sorry for going on a huge tangent. Sometimes I like to dig a little deeper into a comment I see.

Like a cheap whore, they want to be in, out and over, usually with a return-on-investment of less than 10 years.

 

Classic!

Civvik, nice to hear from you again.  I didn't know you were in Orlando these days.  I spent 10 years there about 45 minutes from Orlando on the east coast.  My Mom still lives there though.  My buddy from High School said you are lucky to find a roofer that will re-roof a house for under $10K.  Insurance is through the roof too...  Orlando has its cheap thrills but in the end I do miss it one bit.

 

Good luck in your current job.

Planners to hear public about Banks project

Approvals expected in September, groundbreaking in April

BY JESSICA BROWN | [email protected]

 

PHOTO: http://cmsimg.enquirer.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=AB&Date=20070816&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=708160409&Ref=AR&Profile=1056&MaxW=315&border=1

 

The latest step in the decade-long saga of the Banks riverfront development is expected tonight.

 

Cincinnati's Planning Commission will make its recommendations tonight on updated project plans.

 

The move will advance the project to Cincinnati City Council and Hamilton County Commissioners for review. Both governments are expected to vote by Sept. 12, clearing the way for construction to begin. Officials hope to break ground by April.

 

Full story text is available at

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070816/NEWS01/708160409/1056/COL02

"The first phase, the part closest to the Great American Ball Park, would be finished in late summer 2009 and would include 70,000 square feet of retail and a minimum of 300 residential units. The development would start with apartments in its first phase, rather than condominiums as was originally planned, officials said."

 

Does anyone know if this will now be phase one? The other day they said phase one would include at least 100,000 of office, potentially a hotel and condos (which it appears they have cut out of phase one and are just going with the apartments). Or is the article wrong or just missing the other info?

^ As of late July the first phase was supposed to be what was mentioned in the article, plus 100 condos and 200,000 SF of office space.  The article made it sound like they replaced the condos with apartments, which they didn't.  Either the article is incomplete or it has been changed over the last week or two.  I wouldn't be surprised--the project seems to be changing on a daily basis.

 

I'm sure there will be more reported tomorrow.

 

I've been so confused as to what is transpiring at The Banks. I am preparing a writeup on The Bank's history, but it has become just far too confabulated lately.

Planners sign off on Banks plan

BY JESSICA BROWN | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

August 16, 2007

 

DOWNTOWN - Cincinnati’s planning commission Thursday night recommended approval of a Banks riverfont development that will be twice as dense and could be twice as tall as originally anticipated.

 

The seven-member commission voted 5-1, with one member absent, to recommend approval of the latest Banks plans.

 

The plans put the development at 2.8 million square feet with buildings up to 30 stories tall

 

Full story text is available by selecting the headline

They just want flexibility so if a major corporation wants to build its headquarters there, they can work to accommodate it, said Bailey Pope, of the Dawson Co.

 

“We’re creating a window of opportunity for a fortune-500 company to join the riverfont,” he said.

 

Between this statement, the recent "leaks" about QCS II and the story about Cincinnati being an top place for corporate HQ's...I'm thinking that there is something behind it.  I don't know what, but someone knows something.

Awww, come on Rando!  Don't get our hopes up!!!

 

Oh, and Scott Sloan is on the air right now complaining how Cincinnati doesn't have a Hard Rock.  I'm pretty sure that every suburb in Florida has a Hard Rock... they're about as unique as Friday's these days.

What a shame that we made diversity a priority on the Banks project.  Here's what's happened since Dawson joined the project: it has gotten closer to being built, faster than anyone else was able to do it, and made it more dense and "urban".  The last straw for me will be if Dawson personally has a hand in creating some signature buildings on the Banks.

 

Sorry, I'm taking these anti-sarcasm tablets and they just haven't been working lately.  And my sweat has a bluish tint to it now.

Ha, hey whatever it takes!

Even though phase one has gotten smaller by removing the hotel, condos and office space, it will be a huge step forward just to get phase one with the retail and apartments going. This should help give the project some good momentum for the future phases and show people things are starting to happen in that part of downtown.

Talking with locals, there is one resounding belief.    We have had over 10 years of commission, council, and whatever kind of meetings and approval processes you can throw at one project.   Many people are aware of the project but keep hearing similar statements repetitively over and over.    NOW, we are going to double the size of something that we have been talking about building for what 11 years.  Not trying to be negative, I am more pumped to see this thing get off the ground as the next Nati enthusiast, but until they break ground and start moving some dirt around, maybe pour some concrete here and there, public perseption will not change.    Anyway, I know its a process but locals are starting to wear off on me this week.

So, until the Sep. 12 meeting

(P.S. - I am beginning to think that we may have a secret battle between Butler and his boys across the river and Dawson/Carter as to who can break ground first!) 

Just my opinion but I think Ovation and the Banks are going to be NECESSARY COMPETITORS throughout the construction process.  Totally different projects, I know, but they are very similar in many ways as well.   

I believe they will be one upping each other once one starts turning some dirt.   

They are both sitting idle with a empty urban field if you will, just waiting on the green light.

GO 30 STORIES!!!       This may get interesting!    in a good way!      Both projects are going to catapult the entire river valley infill revolution.   IMO

Both projects are going to catapult the entire river valley infill revolution.

 

Very true, but Ovation is still a ways off before turning dirt.  Even if nothing goes wrong, Ovation is about 2 years (minimum) behind The Banks.

Awww, come on Rando!  Don't get our hopes up!!!

 

Oh, and Scott Sloan is on the air right now complaining how Cincinnati doesn't have a Hard Rock.  I'm pretty sure that every suburb in Florida has a Hard Rock... they're about as unique as Friday's these days.

 

Scott Sloan is an idiot.  He is the only radio DJ, I have ever called up on WLW.  Of course I gave him a piece of my mind about his anti city rants and he hung up on me.  WLW's DJ's are horrible.

For some reason I am/was under the impression they wanted to start end of this year.

GO 30 STORIES!!!       This may get interesting!    in a good way!   

 

I thought it was a silly request.  A 30 story tower on the Banks would be over kill and I agreed with John Schneider's thoughts on his dissenting vote.

They were saying end of this year or early next year...then there was the mix up with AIG exiting the scene.  I'm guessing that pushed it back just slightly, and now you can probably consider early next year instead of late this year.

GO 30 STORIES!!!       This may get interesting!    in a good way!   

 

I thought it was a silly request.  A 30 story tower on the Banks would be over kill and I agreed with John Schneider's thoughts on his dissenting vote.

 

This is a common tactic - Get approval for the maximum amount of development that you could ever hope to do, because you don't have to ask for more later in an ammendment.

 

I have been mum on The Banks for several years now. But honestly, I am disappointed. I have watched it go from something rather unique that honored downtown, to basically a blank slate for Carter to build another Atlanta project. (And if you've been there, it's underwhelming.) Great care was taken in the original plan. The only thing that remains now is the block structure.

 

 

I have been mum on The Banks for several years now. But honestly, I am disappointed. I have watched it go from something rather unique that honored downtown, to basically a blank slate for Carter to build another Atlanta project. (And if you've been there, it's underwhelming.) Great care was taken in the original plan. The only thing that remains now is the block structure.

 

Lets look at the bright side.  Even if Phase I and Phase II yield bland, unoriginal buildings I think the finished project will look great because there are already enough interesting buildings and structures in the Banks neighborhood.  Paul Brown Stadium, the Freedom Center and the Roebling Bridge, and (to a lesser extent) GABP all look fantastic.  There really isnt that much of a need for more signature buildings in that area.  I am hoping for a couple more knockout buildings in Phase I & II, but I dont think they are necessary.

Honestly, I don't think extending the height allowance to 30 stories is a bad idea ...

 

If there's going to be office space, restaurants, entertainment, and residential then what is the difference between the CBD and The Banks? (with of course The Banks being more residential and entertainment, but you get my point) ... All we're doing is extending the CBD in a way, and I am all for the density.

 

There are many cities that have this "canyon" effect to where the towers extend to the water front and it's usually is healthy cities that have realized they're rivers, lakes, seas are prime real estate and build out to it.

I agree BlackBengal,  diversity in buildings is a good thing most of the time.  The riverfront needs to have a modern feel and approach to help appeal even more to the younger (and empty nester) type.  I'm confidant they will do the right thing as long as they stay away from surface lots.  KEEP IT PEDESTRIAN FREINDLY!

If both The Banks and Ovation go through (in addition to the other numerous projects along the river)...the Ohio River will be truly transformed into a gold coast of sorts for the region.  Not to mention, the center-city population/economic clout would absolutely skyrocket.

It will kick ars, and if they saturate the market like it looks as if they will,  Hopefully it will keep prices and rents on a more middle class level and not the overly ridiculous half mill and higher bullcrap that everyone is trending with.  HOPEFULLY!

I am ususally pragmatic about design (and I'm a designer), as long as fundamentals are held true: Block Structure, Pedestrian Orientation, Public Space, Scale. But the Banks area is the heart of the heart of Cincinnati. Whatever happens there will resonate ten times louder than anywhere else, save perhaps Fountain Square.

 

I'm mainly concerned that with one developer and a very large program, they've a tendency to lose their discipline and value-engineer the buildings down to something less appealing. It's hard to describe what that means. But I can point to a lot of Atlantic Station and say "that's underwhelming" and point to a lot of Charlotte infill and say "that's top quality."

 

In the same breath, they also may use the same architect for more than one block. That would be baaaad, bad. You really want to use different architects for different blocks and buildings.

To some extent, because the build-out will be so lengthy, there will inevitably be some variation in design and materials.  Paul Brown Stadium is already 7 years old and will be 10 years old by the time one of these blocks is up an operating even on the most optimistic schedule.  In the short run a building or two that partially block the skyline might throw off the existing balance, but 50 years from now there will be many more high rises along the river on both sides so it will not be so much of an issue.  Specifically, if the land currently occupied by the coliseum is replaces with a residential or office tower, that alone would shift a lot of focus off of the awkwardness of a riverfront tower.     

 

 

 

I am ususally pragmatic about design (and I'm a designer), as long as fundamentals are held true: Block Structure, Pedestrian Orientation, Public Space, Scale. But the Banks area is the heart of the heart of Cincinnati. Whatever happens there will resonate ten times louder than anywhere else, save perhaps Fountain Square.

 

I would agree, as long as they hold the block structure, make it a pedestrian friendly space and try and ensure that the scale works with the street grid, lets just get started. If the project does end up taking 15 years or more I am sure the architecture will change over time any way.

Talking with locals, there is one resounding belief.    We have had over 10 years of commission, council, and whatever kind of meetings and approval processes you can throw at one project.   Many people are aware of the project but keep hearing similar statements repetitively over and over.

 

People are generally pretty clueless about the whole thing, and it shows.  Last night I heard some idiot on the radio say, "It's been ten years.  How long does it take the City to build a park?"

 

I don't know if any of you have read the comments at Cincinnati.com, but there's a ton of cluelessnesss over there, too--including the obligatory "Newport is kicking Cincinnati's ass" comments:

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/comments/threadview.asp?threadid=345

"Newport is kicking Cincinnati's ass"

 

It's amazing that people can't see that they are one in the same.

 

They will either rise or die together.

I have been mum on The Banks for several years now. But honestly, I am disappointed. I have watched it go from something rather unique that honored downtown, to basically a blank slate for Carter to build another Atlanta project. (And if you've been there, it's underwhelming.) Great care was taken in the original plan. The only thing that remains now is the block structure.

 

Look, the "original plan" was nothing more than a glorified artist's rendering meant to help sell the stadium tax.  It did not exist in any form outside of the realm of fantasy.

 

Outside of the parking garages, I have never felt that the Banks is a particularly pressing project for the city.  There was virtually nothing on the riverfront before the new stadiums, and there's virtually nothing down there now.  If this land was as valuable as people on this thread believe, then it would have been developed already.

 

The fact is if you want to build something distinctive, it has to be a public project.  There's a reason why public buildings are typically the most attractive and ornate buildings in any given town.  When you have these public/private partnerships where the public presents a subsidized and packaged deal for private developers, there is obviously a win/win (or use/use, however you want to look at it) situation here- we get privated funds to develop some property and improve the tax base etc., and the developers get virtually guaranteed profits.  And generally the only losers are those who care about aesthetics.  Even that silly Ascent isn't building in Covington is basically a marketing gimmick to make sure the condos sell.  Do you think they would have gotten Liebskind if he hadn't won that WTC competition (even though his design isn't even being used there anymore)?  And as silly as Atlantic Station in Atlanta is, the fact is it's not that bad.  In fact, it's actually quite a tasteful brownfield development, which is essentially what the Banks project is.  It's way better than most new places built in Atlanta.  Can you imagine what a botch job Corporex/Vandecar would have done with the Banks?

 

There are many cities that have this "canyon" effect to where the towers extend to the water front and it's usually is healthy cities that have realized they're rivers, lakes, seas are prime real estate and build out to it.

 

^Exactly.  You'd think from some of this talk that folks here think downtown Manhattan is the eigth circle of hell.  Personally, I think the possible height variance is a good thing, not because I actually believe these guys will find an occupant for a 30 story office tower, but because variation tends to please the eye.  If there's any changes to the plan to be worried about it's those that increase street width or on-street parking.  We should be particularly concerned that the street width be the same as in downtown or thinner, otherwise it will start to feel like a suburban mall.

Look, the "original plan" was nothing more than a glorified artist's rendering meant to help sell the stadium tax.  It did not exist in any form outside of the realm of fantasy.

 

That is very far from the truth, ask the 15 or so members of the Riverfront Advisors who donated months of their time to take the County's insane plan and make it something worth a whole lot more.  Plus, the Banks plan came out well after the sales tax for the stadium was passed.  There were renderings shown during the sales tax campaign, but it was not "The Banks".

 

 

 

 

Much of that ignorance is generated by WLW and the Enquirer.

Look, the "original plan" was nothing more than a glorified artist's rendering meant to help sell the stadium tax.  It did not exist in any form outside of the realm of fantasy.

 

Outside of the parking garages, I have never felt that the Banks is a particularly pressing project for the city.  There was virtually nothing on the riverfront before the new stadiums, and there's virtually nothing down there now.  If this land was as valuable as people on this thread believe, then it would have been developed already.

 

The fact is if you want to build something distinctive, it has to be a public project.  There's a reason why public buildings are typically the most attractive and ornate buildings in any given town.  When you have these public/private partnerships where the public presents a subsidized and packaged deal for private developers, there is obviously a win/win (or use/use, however you want to look at it) situation here- we get privated funds to develop some property and improve the tax base etc., and the developers get virtually guaranteed profits.  And generally the only losers are those who care about aesthetics.  Even that silly Ascent isn't building in Covington is basically a marketing gimmick to make sure the condos sell.  Do you think they would have gotten Liebskind if he hadn't won that WTC competition (even though his design isn't even being used there anymore)?  And as silly as Atlantic Station in Atlanta is, the fact is it's not that bad.  In fact, it's actually quite a tasteful brownfield development, which is essentially what the Banks project is.  It's way better than most new places built in Atlanta.  Can you imagine what a botch job Corporex/Vandecar would have done with the Banks?

 

-The Banks plan was very much not just an illustration. You should educate yourself on the history of that planning process.

 

-Again, if you want examples of truly good infill development, look at Charlotte. And to say that public buildings are the most ornate...do you work in this industry?

Look, the "original plan" was nothing more than a glorified artist's rendering meant to help sell the stadium tax.  It did not exist in any form outside of the realm of fantasy.

That is very far from the truth, ask the 15 or so members of the Riverfront Advisors who donated months of their time to take the County's insane plan and make it something worth a whole lot more.  Plus, the Banks plan came out well after the sales tax for the stadium was passed.  There were renderings shown during the sales tax campaign, but it was not "The Banks".

 

Well, in the mind of the public who had a vague interest in the Riverfront developments those renderings, as well as the information on www.riverfrontplanning.org, consisted of the Banks plan.

 

-The Banks plan was very much not just an illustration. You should educate yourself on the history of that planning process.

 

Why don't you educate me?  Isn't that what the forum discussions are for?  I don't really have the ability to delve deep into this topic at the moment.

 

-Again, if you want examples of truly good infill development, look at Charlotte. And to say that public buildings are the most ornate...do you work in this industry?

 

I can't imagine what Charlotte does that is better than Atlanta, but I am an amateur enthusiast so perhaps there are some elements that I am unaware of.  Regarding public building- historically speaking, churches, centers of government, are typically grander and more ornate/expensive/architecturally famous than private business or homes.  This seems pretty intuitive.  And no, I don't work in the industry.  Why not spend a moment educating yourself by checking out my profile?

Well, in the mind of the public who had a vague interest in the Riverfront developments those renderings, as well as the information on www.riverfrontplanning.org, consisted of the Banks plan.

 

If you go to http://www.cincinnatiport.org/pa_pg5A.html, you can find the entire Banks plan online (riverfrontplanning.org is no longer a valid website).  It is dated September 30, 1999 and the sales tax was passed in 1996. If you have the time, I would suggest going through the entire plan and all the appendices to see exactly what was involved, other than just renderings.

The Banks: Bigger, More Costly

Changes in long-delayed project likely to be approved

BY KEVIN OSBORNE | CITY BEAT

August 22, 2007

 

CINCINNATI - Taxpayers likely will foot more of the bill to build the long-stalled Banks housing and shopping district along Cincinnati's riverfront. In return, local officials and developers want to build a much larger project than originally envisioned.

 

The Cincinnati Planning Commission last week recommended approval for several changes sought by developers in the master plan for The Banks. They include doubling the development space allowed at the 17-acre site from 1.4 million square feet to 2.8 million square feet.

 

Full story text is available by selecting the headline

BY KEVIN OSBORNE | CITY BEAT

I hope this cat doesn't quit his day job!      This news is like, what, a week old.

^You do realize that CityBeat is a weekly publication...right?