What a great piece by Caleb...I was hoping he would do something like this to set the facts straight.  There seems to be a lot of confusion over this and these things needed to be said.

The Banks: Time to get it done

Cincinnati Enquirer

September 26, 2007

 

Maybe Cincinnati politicians don't really go out of their way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, but sometimes it sure seems like it. This week's last-minute fumbling and dithering by City Council members over the Banks is a classic example.

 

The construction of downtown's proposed residential/commercial mega-development on the riverfront, already delayed for years, might get pushed back yet again if council fails to give its OK soon.

 

The Banks Working Group and developers are working to get project documents signed - their unofficial deadline has been the end of September - then submitted to the city and county for approval...

 

It's all just speculation until the vote actually happens...with it being an election year I highly doubt that there will be a majority in opposition to this.

I'm sure that one day soon, I will be enjoying "The Banks" as much as I enjoyed the Stadium Club at Riverfront Stadium!! :wink2:

Businesses: Re-bid The Banks

BY JESSICA BROWN | [email protected]

A group of influential business leaders want the proposed Banks riverfront development project to be re-bid.

 

The letter, directed to City Council members, also urges them to vote against the Banks plans. They said the project is bigger and taller than originally expected and will now compete with downtown.

 

The city’s planning commission approved the changes last month but the city must still sign off on those plans...

 

www.enquirer.com

Developers call for ouster of Banks joint venture

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk Senior staff reporter

 

A coalition of downtown office developers are asking Cincinnati City Council to fire an Atlanta-based joint venture that's trying to finalize development agreements for the Banks riverfront project.

 

The demand comes as developers Carter & Associates Commercial Developer Services LLC and Harold A. Dawson Co., are lobbying local elected leaders to support the higher-density project. Among their weapons is a new three-dimensional model that shows how the project will look next to downtown. The model shows three buildings of 14, 16 and 20 stories in three separate blocks - with most of the remaining structures standing fewer than 6 stories tall...

 

www.cincybizjournals.com

How many articles can the Enquirer/Business Courier write on the SAME EXACT information?

This is turning into Fountain Square West as i saw MANY pages ago.

...now for some uplifting news...

 

Loan to fund Banks garage

THE ENQUIRER

September 25, 2007

 

The Ohio Department of Development said Monday that it is recommending a $5.475 million loan be awarded to Hamilton County to build a "two-story transit and parking structure" along the Ohio River for the Banks riverfront development.

 

The building would connect the riverfront to the transit center downtown and provide a base for future light rail and commuter rail in the area...

 

The nerve of western & southern!! Seems they're nervous that someone else is going to do what they been talking about for 15 years. If they would have started QCS already they wouldn't have anything to worry about.

 

:shoot: And al neyer?? what the??? The same people who can't even complete a project downtown :wtf:, I think they should be concentrating on broadway tower!!

Can we just get the parking garages built already?  I am a little burnt out on the Banks drama and am still waiting for the parking garages to break ground.

...now for some uplifting news...

 

Loan to fund Banks garage

THE ENQUIRER

September 25, 2007

 

 

Hey, that's great news!  The parking structures are the lynchpin of this whole development, and the lackthereof has been a major factor in the decade long delays we've seen up until now.  If we could at least get the ball rolling on the construction of these garages, it would go a long way towards getting the rest to finally take off.

 

And I can't believe they mentioned the transit center and light/commuter rail as a goal that could/should be pursued. 

 

Yeah, $5.475 million is only a drop in the bucket, compared to the amount needed to build these things, but at least it's a start.

Has any of these folks against the current model of the Banks ever confronted the fact that the design includes the POSSIBILITY of ONE building UP TO 30 stories? Am I correct in my understanding of what the design includes? The whole argument centers around the idea of the dozens of 30 stories buildings that are going to hide downtown. I have not heard one of these influential business leaders discuss that fact.

Regardless of your opinion on this matter, you have to admit the Enquirer is being extremely, let me repeat that for emphasis, extremely biased towards Carter on this issue. It is rare to see such bias from a professional newspaper, even for the Enquirer.

I'll agree,      for once they are on the side of progess in Cincy!

What's with this 1o years stuff?  According to http://news.enquirer.com/assets/AB2100635.PDF, the Banks was first conceived in 1999, and the plan 1st unveiled in April 2000 http://www.cincinnatiport.org/APPEND1.PDF , so we are on about 7 years. Not much could happen in the first few years due to all the stadium work and FWW work (Oversaturate the consruction market); then after 9/11 the economy went south, so to say all kinds of work was happening over the last 10 years is not true.

 

oh snap....

 

its funny because I love how seicer says "other cities".  It seemed apparent to me atleast that every project he listed is currently going on in l'ville. 

 

Oh, please. I don't go out and hunt down every city for a cite, but Louisville has over $1 billion worth of projects in the pipeline. Let's count projects over the past two years that have been proposed --

 

Museum Plaza: $469 million 62-story tower. While it may be ugly to some, to others, it is a prime example of avant-garde beauty. Let's not fuss over the design. It's gotten the support of not only the city, but the state, who is financing a large chunk of it with TIF. Includes lofts, museums, parks, offices, and part of UofL.

RiverPark Place: $200 million project along the Ohio, with 600+ units, two 14-story towers, retail, offices, a marina. Two towers and numerous 5-story buildings.

Arena: $250 million project, TIF financing through city-state agreement.

Center City District: $250 million project, through TIF financing part of city-state agreement.

ZirMed Gateway Towers: $25 million 10-story and 12-story residential condo tower.

Iron Quarter: $50 million 10-12 story mixed-use project, through TIF financing part of city-state agreement.

 

Not to say Louisville is better than Cincinnati, but that we have regional and state cooperation which is sorely lacking at The Banks. While our state government is open to the idea of TIF financing and using hotel revenues (e.g. Museum Plaza) to finance portions of the project, the very mention at The Banks seems to stir resentment. Anyone proposing a taller tower gets shot down. Then you have the squabbles between the city, county and various groups who clamor over some minority issue and etc., and it's no wonder why this has taken _10_ years from announcement to this.

....

I've seen larger projects proposed and built faster than The Banks.

....

 

So all those projects listed have gone from paper <announcement> to opening in 2-3 years, as stated upthread? I don't buy that for one minute.

 

Is it the City/County's fault that getting money from C'bus is like squeezing pennies?

Actually yes. Museum Plaza was only conceived several years ago from the owners of the 21c boutique hotel, and both the city and the planner pushed for the tax increment financing -- which is the key for most of the projects that are being built or planned in Louisville. It expedites the funding by allowing special financing districts where the developer can have some taxes deferred for a certain number of years... typically 20 or 30. This saves the developer from having to accumulate funding from various sources, which often take years.

 

Ground breaking is this October. It was only announced on February 9, 2006.

 

Ditto for the other projects in the sense of the shortened time frame. You can find additional topics for verification at UrbanPlanet, where I keep a nice log of projects. Cooperation between the private and public sector is a must, and it is always great if you can have the metro (or in Cinci's case, the city and county) agree with the project. Unfortunately, you have too much conflict between Hamilton county, the city of Cincinnati and the state of Ohio and it makes for unfavorable climates for development.

 

Perhaps it is time for Cinci to seriously consider a metro region similar to Louisville or Lexington Kentucky. Has this been seriously considered in the past five years?

^I don't know about Cincy, but I read something recently about NKY considering it.  I'm not sure how that would work out for them, though, since so much is spread across the 3 counties.  They might have to merge into one uber-county, because a lot of the problems with development on this side of the river are caused by bickering between the counties, not the lack of cooperation between the cities and their respective counties that Cincinnati generally runs into.

^ See this article on NKY's cooperation between the cities. One city pledges to focus on XXX type of project, while another focuses on YYY type of project and so on.

I can't decide what is irritating me more, the time it is taking to get this project started or the recycled Kay-Why cheerleading on a discussion about the Banks.  The Cincy threads seem to attract a lot of trolling from surprising sources in general though...enough ranting.

 

My opinion is if council flinches now, this will go down the drain.  I still do not understand why they have not just broken this into smaller pieces.  Maybe if the garages get built they could still parse it out, but if this falls through the city's already strained relationship with developers will be damaged so much that they will get very little future interest.  Castellini really needs to step up and mediate this before it is too late.

"Kay-Why"?

 

I am wondering why it has not been broken up as well. I'm fairly certain that the value of the land isn't that exaggerated that mutliple developers couldn't develop a project on one parcel. In my opinion, that could give some variety to the architectural styles.

UGH. Just when I thought the Enquirer had.... oh never mind.

 

Start over on Banks?

Change in size requires rebidding, businesses argue

BY JESSICA BROWN AND JANE PRENDERGAST

 

Influential downtown business interests Wednesday asked Cincinnati City Council to reject new plans for a denser, taller Banks - and declared that council needs to rebid the entire riverfront project.

 

As that letter was being sent, a flurry of activity was taking place on the other side of the issue. In a Great American Ball Park office, developers met with a parade of City Council members, county commissioners and the media, seeking to allay those concerns...

 

Perhaps it is time for Cinci to seriously consider a metro region similar to Louisville or Lexington Kentucky. Has this been seriously considered in the past five years?

 

Sure the idea has been thrown around out there...but the State government is ultimately what rules supreme and State regulations in Ohio are much different than many other states in this regard.  You just don't see a whole lot of metro-governments in the Midwest (thank you very much NW Ordinance).  Indy has one and Cbus has one by default of massive annexations.  Other than that they just don't exist...Ohio in particular thanks to the massive amount of authority that has been granted to townships and other unincorporated areas.

The latest weapon in their arsenal: a scale model of the project with a removable 30-story building

. :lol: Oh man I want to stick a Burj Dubai in the center of that mother!

 

Perhaps it is time for Cinci to seriously consider a metro region similar to Louisville or Lexington Kentucky. Has this been seriously considered in the past five years?

 

Sure the idea has been thrown around out there...but the State government is ultimately what rules supreme and State regulations in Ohio are much different than many other states in this regard.  You just don't see a whole lot of metro-governments in the Midwest (thank you very much NW Ordinance).  Indy has one and Cbus has one by default of massive annexations.  Other than that they just don't exist...Ohio in particular thanks to the massive amount of authority that has been granted to townships and other unincorporated areas.

 

Now I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you aren't a lawyer either, Rando, and the Northwest Ordinance has nothing to do with the lack of metro governments in Ohio or the Midwest.  There's no Metro government in San Francisco or Los Angeles, and they don't have townships in California.  The whole theory of townships was that they would serve the functions of local government until the population reached a size that would encourage it to incorporate.  That was still the standard- witness the proliferation of small cities in the Greater Cincinnati and Greater Cleveland areas- until recently.  Now that a Democratic majority exists both in City Hall and in the County Commission local government co-operation has greatly increased.  But for the Cincinnati area to have a meaningful metropolitan government, the authority would have to overlap three different states, and there simply isn't the institutional structure to handle that anywhere in the U.S.

 

Personally I think both higher densities and smaller blocks would be good for the Banks.  And I believe this stall is largely sour grapes from the local real estate elites.  But I don't think we should be deriding these different polities from doing their due diligence and examining the changed rules for the project that they are supposed to contribute money toward.  This is pretty typical for, and is the liability of, so-called public/private partnerships.  A model is proposed, and a private developer chosen.  Then after a while, the private developer needs more access to private profit to make the development worth his while.  Any municipal or state government can raise just as much money for development as a private firm, but since that is not the style of the times anymore, we are left with this sort of bait-and-switch operation.  Why we need to guarantee tax revenues to a private firm to build something that a bond issue backed by those same tax revenues could build by itself and completely in house is a mystery to me.

^ See this article on NKY's cooperation between the cities. One city pledges to focus on XXX type of project, while another focuses on YYY type of project and so on.

 

So Newport, based on past history, would get the "XXX" project...right?  Teehee...

Deal-breaker?

Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Lucy May and Dan Monk Senior Staff Reporters

Friday, September 28, 2007

 

As much as one-third of what an Atlanta development team has proposed for the Banks can't be built under the terms of the Cincinnati Bengals' stadium lease with Hamilton County.

 

That's according to the developers themselves, who said if the lease deal remains unchanged, it would eliminate between 900,000 and 1 million square feet of the proposed project...

 

The Northwest Ordinance established the rectangle survey system as a way to sell off and govern the vastness of the frontier in an organized fashion.  The grid was chosen to be both easier to survey and easier to litigate (far fewer property line disputes) and Hamilton County is probably the most messed-up of all Northwest Territory counties due to it being only the second area to be surveyed and the half-ass job done by the Symmes Purchase survey crew.  Specifically, they used magnetic north instead of true north (somewhat of a widespread problem in Ohio, but rare in Indiana and points west) and Symmes himself and other early property owners outright ignored stipulations of the federal land sale, such as simply selling off the Hamilton County township section in Springfield Township that was supposed to be reserved for a university (Miami University).

 

Part of the problem with midwestern city/county governments is actually the size of the counties.  In the south the counties tend to be somewhat smaller and out west, such as Los Angeles and Orange Counties, much bigger.  Right now a lot of the residential and a lot of the commercial growth in the metro is happening just a short skip outside of Hamilton County...if the county was smaller then perhaps there wouldn't be so many smaller municipalities interfering with the prospects of city/county government and if the county was 20% or 30% larger the shift of tax revenues to Butler and Warren Counties would be such a big deal since they'd still be in Hamilton County.   

   

I don't see how there can really ever be any city/county metro government in Hamilton County...all of the small cities hate Cincinnati and defiantly carry on attempting to block section 8 housing, social services, and the other junk concentrated in the Cincinnati city limits.  Be it North College Hill or The City of The Village of Indian Hill, all these small cities are about isolation and in certain cases exploiting the windfall tax revenue of specific industries within their borders.  In cities with fewer big industries, especially in the south and west, there was much less incentive for neighborhoods to incorporate around a tax-generating teat, although perhaps the situation in Hamilton County also owes itself to the particular speed with which Cincinnati expanded.     

 

My point was that the NW Ordinance was the architect behind the stratification of government that the Midwest has.  Other areas of the country do not have this same set-up.  Now from there Ohio has continued to empower and embrace the township form of government while other Midwestern states have not (Indiana).

My point was that the NW Ordinance was the architect behind the stratification of government that the Midwest has.  Other areas of the country do not have this same set-up.  Now from there Ohio has continued to empower and embrace the township form of government while other Midwestern states have not (Indiana).

 

And my point was that I don't buy your argument.  How many suburbs, be they bedroom communities or small industry towns, does Chicago have?  Or L.A.?  Or Northern New Jersey?  The thesis that this is specifically a Cincinnati problem, or an Ohio problem, or a Northwest Ordinance problem (Indiana was settled under the provisions of the NW Ordinance, by the way) doesn't hold up against the facts.

 

Regarding jmeck's comment that the outer suburbs "hate" the City of Cincinnati, I'd say that the hate the place no more or less than the City of Clifton or other such corporations in the 19th Century cherished their so-called independence.  But there was a political will there to change the rules to favor a majority who preferred annexation.

"The lease generally limits how tall buildings can be west of the stadium."

 

Oh, then there's no issue, since The Banks is EAST of the stadium!  :-D  The reporting from The Cincinnati Business Courier is starting to remind me of The Enquirer.

As soon as I saw that model Carter and Dawson showed off this week, I saw that tall building near PBS and thought, "the Bengals will never allow it."

They hate the city because their small cities exist to a)give what would otherwise be a neighborhood a degree of autonomy and b)preserve property values.  Cincinnati is seen as the source of all evils that would threaten the investment in their homes and bucolic surroundings, also CPS.  Also Cincinnati city council for obvious reasons receives much more press and so the various clowns who have sat on city council are much better known than the many clowns to sit on the various councils of the small cities.  The overall attitude is that the various people on councils around the county who have never left their 4 square mile city, don't have a degree, etc., are better at running their affairs than the people on Cincinnati city council.

 

It's a problem nationwide and it's a problem in other democratic countries that local governments are totally unable to deal intelligently with developers, development issues, transportation planning, etc.  This is because it's not emphasized at all in schools and a galaxy of superstition is allowed to swirl around these issues in the minds of those who don't take them seriously.  And also since many of these suburban cities can only pay their elected people $2,000 or $3,000 a year they can't be expected or required to attend OKI meetings and meetings for other regional matters let alone read up on things ahead of time and do independent research.   

 

 

 

^Great article in the recent issue of The New Republic by Sarah Williams Goldhagen saying similar things.

 

My point was that the NW Ordinance was the architect behind the stratification of government that the Midwest has.  Other areas of the country do not have this same set-up.  Now from there Ohio has continued to empower and embrace the township form of government while other Midwestern states have not (Indiana).

 

And my point was that I don't buy your argument.  How many suburbs, be they bedroom communities or small industry towns, does Chicago have?  Or L.A.?  Or Northern New Jersey?  The thesis that this is specifically a Cincinnati problem, or an Ohio problem, or a Northwest Ordinance problem (Indiana was settled under the provisions of the NW Ordinance, by the way) doesn't hold up against the facts.

 

It's not really an point of view...rather I'm just stating the fact that the NW Ordinance set up the structure for townships and what not to exist.  Ohio then embraced that and made it particularly more difficult to annex and expand cities.  Not all of the areas within the NW Ordinance area are the same...that is because they took different paths (as I mentioned with Indiana).  I don't see what is so bold and/or controversial about my statement.

I find it ironic that the only thing the Cincinnati Bengals have won in the last decade is sweet lease terms on a non-existent development.

^Great article in the recent issue of The New Republic by Sarah Williams Goldhagen saying similar things.

 

 

Someday soon a to be - famous historian will argue that while Americans have long tended to organize themselves geographically. For much of the 20th C until really the mid-70s, in most cities they also organized themselves institutionally. This gave urban life so much of its energy and what made them work. What changed by the mid-70s is that as the cities were seen to be irrevocable decline (and African-American and poor), the populations that flowed out of them became ever more convinced of the importance of creating homogeneous geographic communities rather than the institutional homogeneity that existed for many of them before. There are actually decent structural explanations for the postwar suburbanization - the real city hating doesn't show up until the 60s and 70s.

What complicates this of course is at the same time crappy urban renewal was ending and real gentrification was starting to take place.

Was that a bigger deal than winning the conference?

 

I find it ironic that the only thing the Cincinnati Bengals have won in the last decade is sweet lease terms on a non-existent development.

Was that a bigger deal than winning the conference?

 

I find it ironic that the only thing the Cincinnati Bengals have won in the last decade is sweet lease terms on a non-existent development.

 

Oh-snap!

This last-minute opposition from the downtown buisness interests is suprising as one would have thought they would have been on-board early on....but apparently they see downtown as some sort of zero-sum game, where new development cannibalizes old?

 

Also, is this serious opposition? 

Reps from Carter and Dawson were on Channel 12's Newsmakers this morning showing their model and explaining the density and square footage requirements.  The sounded fantastic and made great points, the flashed back a few weeks ago to Roxanne Qualls's comments about them as developers and the project, and she looked foolish (I agree that she has been out of town for years and has not been in the loop and should not have made such comments).  Apparently they have been in town all week meeting with local leaders and politicians and said they WILL have all documents done and signed by today's deadline.  Let's hope our leaders move this thing along!

This last-minute opposition from the downtown buisness interests is suprising as one would have thought they would have been on-board early on....but apparently they see downtown as some sort of zero-sum game, where new development cannibalizes old?

 

Also, is this serious opposition? 

 

It all changed when the developers proposed the 30-story maximum height variance. Bad move.

It is not a bad move if increasing the density is the only way that you can make the finances work.................

If they were feasible before, given that they were pushing the lower density plan for years, and had worked their way up to the point that it was generally accepted as a strong possibility, why screw it up by proposing the higher density option? Surely the downtown Cincinnati market has not dipped to the point that a 30-story building must be plopped down for the project to be feasible...

And your reasoning that the plan was feasible before would be??  Is the feasibility of the lower density project the reason construction has been started?? 

 

The businesses are not just objecting to a 30 story tower they are objecting to the greater density of the overall project.  The overall project is now going to be a lot more dense even without the 30 story tower.  The increase in density will help increase the TIF base thus providing enough money to build the parking garages and other basic amenities that are required.

 

Maybe if the project was planned with greater density from the beginning construction would have already been started...........

Lets say the housing market for $500,000+ condos isn't what it used to be (which it isn't)...in order to tap into the market that is still currently viable you have to utilize higher densities to make the finances work...hence the increase in residential units a little while back.

 

As for the office it is not about making the project financially doable, but rather more profitable.  Everyone would love to build as much office as possible since it is essentially a cash cow for developers and the municipality.  They will only build as much office space as what is demanded (meaning they won't build spec space and cannibalize the downtown office market).  If they have a tenant lined up then you can sure as hell bet that they'll do everything in their power to accommodate them, and can you blame them?

That final Banks agreement?

Approval meeting is canceled

 

"A Banks Working Group meeting scheduled for today has been canceled. The Group gave no explanation in the e-mailed announcement sent at 5 p.m. Monday.

 

Although the Working Group had not confirmed the purpose of the meeting, it was expected to announce the finalization of an agreement with Atlanta developers Carter Real Estate and Harold Dawson Co. to build the Banks, an 18-acre neighborhood district on Cincinnati's central riverfront...

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071002/NEWS01/710020312

---

While it appears there are several issue still not finished, I think the one about financing is the biggest. Ever since AIG pulled out with the money no one has said who is going to 'pony up the money' to get this built. Sure, government has promised X amount but, the private side has never released their part of the financing. Hopeful a new deadline will be set and an agreement will be signed very soon. Cincy needs the Banks to happen.

^ Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Carter and Dawson were financing this?

 

Qualls stated that they (Carter and Dawson) weren't large enough to finance a project like this and they came back stating that they have already financed projects to similar scale. Carter and Dawson stated that they use equity from current/old projects to provide financing for new ones.

^ Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Carter and Dawson were financing this?

 

Qualls stated that they (Carter and Dawson) weren't large enough to finance a project like this and they came back stating that they have already financed projects to similar scale. Carter and Dawson stated that they use equity from current/old projects to provide financing for new ones.

 

They will get financing for the project through the market, not be able to pay for it out of pocket obviously.  I think Qualls was referring to the loss of AIG, which would have brought the cash to the table as a financial partner, not a developer.