I'm still shocked how ambivalent the local cincy companies are towards urban revival.  Greaters is the only one that gets it with their OTR store, which I'm sure is a practice format for a store in Chicago once they finally make it to the city here (probably delayed versus the suburbs due to a corrupt system of permitting that is in dire need of reform).

 

I'm not sure what the holdup is for UDF, Skyline Chili, or LaRosas - they all should be focusing on capitalizing on growth in the urban core - the writing is on the wall, I'm wondering if its just sheer parochialism that's holding them back.

 

Often overlooked in these conversations, Izzy's always got it, with their two CBD locations.  Skyline is sort of there as well, but really should have a presence at either the Banks or in OTR, given how widely popular they are.  Totally agree on the rest.

 

I love the idea of a late night Skyline open at The Banks in the old Johnny Rockets. 

Opening a Banks location would really hurt their Sycamore location since they stay open later on Reds game days. Also the Skyline on Vine and 7th stays open pretty late. There's no reason for the one on Court Street to stay open late when there is one 3 blocks away doing it. And they're hardly ever packed. So I don't think the Court Street location is missing out on a gold mine.

 

I think the owners of the Sycamore location should relocate in the former Johnny Rockets location.

 

We had the exact same idea apparently. Nice.

 

Also, how late is the 7th and Vine one open? I just know the Court Street one is closed by 5PM.

The 7/Vine location is usually open until 7 or 8, I believe. But they are closed on Sundays.

 

That's late enough to get a dinner rush. They would be dead for 4 hours if they stayed open until bar closing though. The only logical locations for a late night location are in OTR and The Banks.

Latest master plan for The Banks:

 

 

Not so sure about that block closest to Paul Brown Stadium...

 

Are you sure this is the latest master plan for the Banks? Several things look like the old plans such as townhouses facing the event lawn and the buildings in the GE block.

 

I agree that the block closest to Paul Brown looks strange, but I take as big of issue with this design with the block of Phase 3a which just broke ground. Looks like a superblock with a massive interior above ground parking garage. Surely, with the largest parking garage in North America located just underneath that location, the developer can work out SOME deal with the county so that residential units can utilize the underground garage and have that count towards their parking requirements, and the physical space devoted to the above ground parking garage can be repurposed into more residential units. In fact taxpayers should be DEMANDING that, to fit in as many units as possible, to get the highest return on the massive investment made by the city, county, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as possible.

 

My suggestion would be to split the superblock in half with an east-west narrow woonerf between Ted Berry Way and Race St that would allow vehicle traffic for pickup, drop off, and deliveries only. Then you could have another two rows of apartments/condos with ground floor retail facing the woonerf that would occupy the footprint and airspace above of where the superblock garage would have been.

^^ going along with the above, I've never fully understood what the underground parking at the banks is for... If the goal is to just life everything out of the flood plain, concrete stilts would work just fine. Who is supposed to use all that parking? If not residents, then CBD workers? If so, why is there such a need for in-building parking with each new proposed tower?

I wonder what the underground garage usage rate is on non-game days. It's a great asset to have in between to stadiums of course but you don't build the church for Easter Sunday as they say. In any case the Bengals aren't used to having the 600 spaces that are going in underneath that block, so you think you could get away with designating 200 or so to the above ground development that would receive more around the clock usage.

crazy to think that ~700 parking spaces costs $29 million, or around $40k / spot. What would a $40k bus stop look like? Or in pedestrian improvements? How nice could we make it to walk around downtown with that kind of money?

crazy to think that ~700 parking spaces costs $29 million, or around $40k / spot. What would a $40k bus stop look like? Or in pedestrian improvements? How nice could we make it to walk around downtown with that kind of money?

 

Assuming ongoing maintenance is offset by inflation, at the current price of about $125 a month, the ROI is about 26 years. Imagine the outrage if people were told the Streetcar was guaranteed to be a money loser for nearly three decades.

 

What's also ignored in this assumption is the plethora of surface lots and garages on the periphery of downtown that have plenty of empty spots every day.

I wonder what the underground garage usage rate is on non-game days. It's a great asset to have in between to stadiums of course but you don't build the church for Easter Sunday as they say. In any case the Bengals aren't used to having the 600 spaces that are going in underneath that block, so you think you could get away with designating 200 or so to the above ground development that would receive more around the clock usage.

 

Good question.  Are there any published figures for use of the existing Banks garages?  I think we're too eager to accept what has already been built as an income generator for the county. 

I believe Cincinnati Bell recently signed a lease for 1000 spaces at the Banks garage.

Though this would all be relevant if this was just some garage being built elsewhere, none of it matters when the real purpose is to make development even possible. These garages aren't just garages, they're foundations for large buildings. Without these garages there would be no way to build out of the flood plane without pushing the entire cost off to the developer who would never be able to make that work financially. And the alternative of just filling in the ground to raise it up is more expensive. So we get a parking garage that's honestly far too large, but there really isn't an alternative here that makes any sense or is any cheaper or more plausible.

^I'm definitely in favor of building out the entire underground garage as planned. It would be a huge missed opportunity if we didn't based off of all the reasons you said. And it's in between two stadiums so it makes perfect sense. My point is simply, why does the above ground development require additional above ground attached parking when the underground garage could be utilized? Perhaps someone thinks the market requires above ground attached parking for these developments but I think the demand will be off the charts regardless. Or perhaps the rendering of the phase 3a site has already changed and is yet to be revealed.

^Because the underground garage has to be vacated during events meaning residents have to move their cars. The above ground garages do not.

 

It's definitely a stupid setup. There should be a better way of having gameday parking and resident parking work together.

I think that rendering is outdated so who knows on the surface parking.  Vacating the spaces IS asinine.  Those garages are never going to be full.  Anytime I've been in there, even on event days, there are rows of open spots in the farther flung wings.

 

Did anybody notice the wording in some of the press yesterday?  That this is a $XX million dollar extension of the Intermodal Transit Center.

 

On the restaurant thing, the Skyline at Main and Freedom is genius.  And when I envision "flagship", I see where these could be creative about creating buzz by including merchandise POS and giving the location the "Flagship" or "Original" moniker (newness of the location notwithstanding).

 

One thing is true, The Banks certainly provides plenty to stay interested in and seemingly will for another 8-20 years.

That rendering is definitely dated. It was the second version of the site plan. Before this was released the GE block was identical on the rendering to the phase 3 block. They basically copy/pasted phase 1's residential buildings and called it a day just for representation. I would imagine we would see something along the height of the phase 2 residential building for phase 3 since demand is so high for living space down there. And CR Architects have been fired from the development for awhile so we're definitely not going to see phase 1 style buildings again.

I wonder what the underground garage usage rate is on non-game days. It's a great asset to have in between to stadiums of course but you don't build the church for Easter Sunday as they say. In any case the Bengals aren't used to having the 600 spaces that are going in underneath that block, so you think you could get away with designating 200 or so to the above ground development that would receive more around the clock usage.

R

 

Good question.  Are there any published figures for use of the existing Banks garages?  I think we're too eager to accept what has already been built as an income generator for the county. 

 

According to this there are only 20 available monthly spots out of the 3,387 spots in The Banks garage. Obviously a certain percentage of spots are set aside for short term parking, but I don't know how many that would be. In my experience the lowest level off of Mehring Way is fairly vacant during regular business days. The lots that fill up are the cheapest ones on the periphery of downtown. Cincinnatians are cheap, I'd rather save $150 a month and walk 10 minutes from my building to my car than pay $200 to park in a garage downtown, and I'm not alone.

^Because the underground garage has to be vacated during events meaning residents have to move their cars. The above ground garages do not.

 

It's definitely a stupid setup. There should be a better way of having gameday parking and resident parking work together.

 

The south building of Current @ The Banks has their resident parking in a fenced in area on the 2nd level of the underground garage.  Entrance is behind Jefferson Social off Walnut St.

Maybe they were allowed some parking underground but not enough to handle all the parking needs? Isn't the northern building of Phase 1's parking all above ground?

I wonder what the underground garage usage rate is on non-game days. It's a great asset to have in between to stadiums of course but you don't build the church for Easter Sunday as they say. In any case the Bengals aren't used to having the 600 spaces that are going in underneath that block, so you think you could get away with designating 200 or so to the above ground development that would receive more around the clock usage.

R

 

Good question.  Are there any published figures for use of the existing Banks garages?  I think we're too eager to accept what has already been built as an income generator for the county. 

 

According to this there are only 20 available monthly spots out of the 3,387 spots in The Banks garage. Obviously a certain percentage of spots are set aside for short term parking, but I don't know how many that would be. In my experience the lowest level off of Mehring Way is fairly vacant during regular business days. The lots that fill up are the cheapest ones on the periphery of downtown. Cincinnatians are cheap, I'd rather save $150 a month and walk 10 minutes from my building to my car than pay $200 to park in a garage downtown, and I'm not alone.

 

When I RedBiked through the garage a few months ago there were hundreds of empty spaces.

That rendering is from roughly 2012.  While they've released some renderings updating the phase 2 area, they haven't released a new "master plan" rendering yet.  Everything to the east is just placeholder rough estimate type stuff.

"The private development above the phase 3 parking garage is expected to be up to $125 million and include up to 400,000 square feet of space."

 

Any one care to guess what this will end up looking like as far as massing and height?

Imagine phase 2's apartment building wrapping the entire block and that's about what it would be if they choose a very basic hollow rectangle plan for the site. Possibly slightly shorter by a story or so. It would likely fit between 450-500 apartments depending on average square footage per unit if they choose to go purely residential with a retail base.

 

For reference this is the most recent aerial rendering we have gotten. The AC Hotel isn't included and later phases are still generic, but the park and Phase 2 are accurate in this image.

 

I wonder what the underground garage usage rate is on non-game days. It's a great asset to have in between to stadiums of course but you don't build the church for Easter Sunday as they say. In any case the Bengals aren't used to having the 600 spaces that are going in underneath that block, so you think you could get away with designating 200 or so to the above ground development that would receive more around the clock usage.

R

 

Good question.  Are there any published figures for use of the existing Banks garages?  I think we're too eager to accept what has already been built as an income generator for the county. 

 

According to this there are only 20 available monthly spots out of the 3,387 spots in The Banks garage. Obviously a certain percentage of spots are set aside for short term parking, but I don't know how many that would be. In my experience the lowest level off of Mehring Way is fairly vacant during regular business days. The lots that fill up are the cheapest ones on the periphery of downtown. Cincinnatians are cheap, I'd rather save $150 a month and walk 10 minutes from my building to my car than pay $200 to park in a garage downtown, and I'm not alone.

 

When I RedBiked through the garage a few months ago there were hundreds of empty spaces.

 

What day/time? Just walked through at lunch and I'd estimate the Baseball Block 50% full, Bridge Block 90% full, Freedom Center Block 99% full, and the Football Block with only 5-6 cars. With the Reds in town there is a barricade up between Baseball and Bridge so that may be why it isn't as full.

^Because the underground garage has to be vacated during events meaning residents have to move their cars. The above ground garages do not.

 

It's definitely a stupid setup. There should be a better way of having gameday parking and resident parking work together.

 

I'm not really buying that reasoning. If we have a flood significant enough to flood the Banks garage, residents can move their cars into other parking garages downtown. The loss of parking for downtown workers during the flood would be a much larger concern.

 

I believe the underground parking is owned and managed by the county, and they simply did not want to give up any parking spaces for the residents of the buildings upstairs. It's absurd. There's no reason we should be building parking garages on top of an underground parking garage. It also has the side effect of creating huge blocks with a thin layer of apartments facing each street and a garage hidden in the middle. Imagine if each block at The Banks was split in two with additional north-south streets. (Maybe even call them Clay, Republic, and Pleasant as they would line up with their counterparts in OTR.) The smaller block size would make it feel much more like an actual urban environment and might even help with phasing.

Though this would all be relevant if this was just some garage being built elsewhere, none of it matters when the real purpose is to make development even possible. These garages aren't just garages, they're foundations for large buildings. Without these garages there would be no way to build out of the flood plane without pushing the entire cost off to the developer who would never be able to make that work financially. And the alternative of just filling in the ground to raise it up is more expensive. So we get a parking garage that's honestly far too large, but there really isn't an alternative here that makes any sense or is any cheaper or more plausible.

 

I agree that buildings should be lifted out of the flood plain, but wouldn't a stilt structure accomplish that? Basically the parking garage without the second (middle) level complicating things and increasing the cost?

 

 

Travis, loving your idea for smaller blocks as a continuation of the over-the-rhine street grid.

Though this would all be relevant if this was just some garage being built elsewhere, none of it matters when the real purpose is to make development even possible. These garages aren't just garages, they're foundations for large buildings. Without these garages there would be no way to build out of the flood plane without pushing the entire cost off to the developer who would never be able to make that work financially. And the alternative of just filling in the ground to raise it up is more expensive. So we get a parking garage that's honestly far too large, but there really isn't an alternative here that makes any sense or is any cheaper or more plausible.

 

I agree that buildings should be lifted out of the flood plain, but wouldn't a stilt structure accomplish that? Basically the parking garage without the second (middle) level complicating things and increasing the cost?

 

 

I'm not getting the logic in this.  Buildings on two story stilts?  What would the space be used for underneath?  It has to be used in some way other than maybe growing mushrooms. 

 

Does adding parking decks add significant cost? Yes.  But it also gives the space underneath the ability to earn money back toward the investment while serving the purpose of surmounting the flood plain.  The middle deck(s) are the supply that meets the demand.

 

 

I don't think the people complaining about a sea of empty parking understand that a hotel and multiple office buildings have not come online yet.  For a second I thought I had accidentally stumbled onto the enquirer.com comment section.

When GE building comes online that's anywhere from 1,200-2,000 employees. Plus 300 more apartments. Plus 200 room hotel. That's a lot of cars that are not there currently.

^ the problem is it shouldn't be.  We should expect some of these people to live in OTR or downtown and walk, some of them to take the bus, some not to own cars.

Even if half didn't own cars (which is an unlikely percentage) that's still 1,000-1,200 cars in the garage everyday. Not a small amount.

1,000-1,200 cars or 25-30 buses.  I'd like to see one of these kinds of comparisons done for numbers like that, except instead of an urban street it's set in the

 

^ the problem is it shouldn't be.  We should expect some of these people to live in OTR or downtown and walk, some of them to take the bus, some not to own cars.

 

Some will probably live in Covington. We should figure out a way to make the Roebling more bikeable.

 

Also get to building way more residential units in Cincinnati.

If the Riverfront Transit Center was a 2-level parking garage instead of an unused bus terminal, there would be at least 1,000 more underground parking spaces.  Also, the "yard house" block south of the Freedom Center is the old FWW levee pushed south a few hundred feet.  If that was also a parking garage, there would be at least 500 more underground spaces.  So at least 1,500, and perhaps more than 2,000 more underground parking spaces could have been built. 

 

The real mess with The Banks is the Freedom Center, which got the project's center square because it was looking for a location to build for several years before The Banks was announced.  If there was an ordinary development there instead of a poorly attended museum, the whole feel of the place would be different. 

 

If the Riverfront Transit Center was a 2-level parking garage instead of an unused bus terminal, there would be at least 1,000 more underground parking spaces.  Also, the "yard house" block south of the Freedom Center is the old FWW levee pushed south a few hundred feet.  If that was also a parking garage, there would be at least 500 more underground spaces.  So at least 1,500, and perhaps more than 2,000 more underground parking spaces could have been built. 

 

The real mess with The Banks is the Freedom Center, which got the project's center square because it was looking for a location to build for several years before The Banks was announced.  If there was an ordinary development there instead of a poorly attended museum, the whole feel of the place would be different. 

 

 

Disagree...

 

My understanding is the RTC is heavily used bus terminal during events and game days.

 

The Freedom Center is perfect right where it is. One, it looks great as an architectural centerpiece. Two, it's location is symbolic given the role of the Ohio River in our country's (and city's) racial history as the dividing line between north and south and its history on the Underground Railroad. The Freedom Center is really a powerful place to visit.

 

I will say that it is hard to reconcile the gravitas of the Freedom Center with the party hardy Wrigleyville vibe the rest of the Banks is giving off though. And that's OK, it's just how it is. Bar-crazy OTR has like a million church bells ringing on Sunday morning.

 

I also thought the "Yardhouse Fill" is appropriate as well.  It makes for a more earthy and significant landing for Roebling begin on terra firma.  But no that you pointed it out, it is essentially an island.  It really has no function at all as a levee since it is surrounded by garage on three sides and open air on the fourth.  Is this correct or do the park reception areas and utilities continue that far north under the lawn?

If the Riverfront Transit Center was a 2-level parking garage instead of an unused bus terminal, there would be at least 1,000 more underground parking spaces.  Also, the "yard house" block south of the Freedom Center is the old FWW levee pushed south a few hundred feet.  If that was also a parking garage, there would be at least 500 more underground spaces.  So at least 1,500, and perhaps more than 2,000 more underground parking spaces could have been built. 

 

The real mess with The Banks is the Freedom Center, which got the project's center square because it was looking for a location to build for several years before The Banks was announced.  If there was an ordinary development there instead of a poorly attended museum, the whole feel of the place would be different. 

 

 

Disagree...

 

My understanding is the RTC is heavily used bus terminal during events and game days.

 

The Freedom Center is perfect right where it is. One, it looks great as an architectural centerpiece. Two, it's location is symbolic given the role of the Ohio River in our country's (and city's) racial history as the dividing line between north and south and its history on the Underground Railroad. The Freedom Center is really a powerful place to visit.

 

I will say that it is hard to reconcile the gravitas of the Freedom Center with the party hardy Wrigleyville vibe the rest of the Banks is giving off though. And that's OK, it's just how it is. Bar-crazy OTR has like a million church bells ringing on Sunday morning.

 

 

The RTC may be heavily used on gamedays--I don't think anyone is disputing that--but the larger point Jake is making is right.  There could be a whole bunch more parking spaces as part of the garage than there actually are. 

Mayor: Scrap the office tower and do condos at the Banks (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/08/25/mayor-scrap-the-office-tower-and-do-condos-at-the.html)

 

Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley said it’s time for the Banks developers to look at a different use for first phase development pad earmarked for an office tower.

...

“They should reconsider that as a condo site,” Cranley said.

 

But Dan McCarthy, project executive for the Banks lead developer, Carter, said there has never been any conversation about switching the use for the site.

 

“We are moving full speed ahead with plans for class A office there,” McCarthy told me. “This will be a premier office building with high visibility. I can’t think of a better option for a large class A office user.”

 

Two things immediately come time mind because this Mayor has made me extremely cynical:

[*]The Mayor has a condo developer friend who would like the site

[*]The Mayor wants to grease the skids for his pal John Barrett and the new W&S tower, eliminating competition

 

 

My thoughts...

 

“They should reconsider that as a condo site,” Cranley said.

 

But Dan McCarthy, project executive for the Banks lead developer, Carter, said there has never been any conversation about switching the use for the site.

 

Of course Cranley would make a comment like this without having any discussion with the developer first.

 

Doesn't the developer's agreement with the city specify that this site must be developed as office space? Wouldn't they need to amend this agreement to allow for it to be developed as something else?

 

It's hard to argue with the need for downtown condos, though. This would also add a few hundred residents directly next to streetcar stop #1, who would probably use the streetcar as their primary way to get to their workplace, dining, and entertainment.

Honestly, though I hate the guy and the way he said it, I actually agree with him. Even with phase 2 built out we're still only about halfway through construction of buildings at The Banks. If demand for office increases there are still plenty of places to put large buildings that can fill that need. But residential is the most important thing right now since supply cannot keep up with demand. And having a 20ish story residential building right there could attract some pretty high profile clients. Unimpeded view of the river, nice view of the southern part of the CBD, views of the hills, etc. It's a great site for a condo building that's taller than the other residential buildings in The Banks.

 

Doesn't the developer's agreement with the city specify that this site must be developed as office space? Wouldn't they need to amend this agreement to allow for it to be developed as something else?

 

 

The agreement gives the developers rights to develop a certain amount of square footage for different uses (residential, office, hotel). My concern is that if the office pad is converted to residential it would mean more office is concentrated on the western half of the development and is not as spread out as planned. The other thing is that they would likely expand the above ground garage to facilitate the residential structure, something they have done with every residential phase in the past. So we are probably not going to get a 20 story condo if the parking pad is only two or three stories on such a small pad.

Why not? 3 stories of parking on that site with a 17 story residential building above with 200 units or so isn't unrealistic.

There are sites like the Pogue's Garage, and even the currently empty Ingalls Building and/or Terrace Plaza that would be perfect for condos. The Banks needs some more diversity, and residential needs to be spread around the CBD.

If John Cranley is so gung ho on downtown condominiums, perhaps he should talk to some of his buddies like Arn Bortz. His Towne Properties owns the five acre Adams Landing site where two additional condo buildings were planned. They have been scrapped in favor of $2sqft apartments geared towards a "slightly older renter than those typically found at the Banks or in Over-the-Rhine."

 

There is also the vacant One River Plaza lot owned by the Gregory family...

Isn't Towne the one doing the building over Macy's Downtown that will be condos?

225 apartments by Town Properties according to this post: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,12534.msg668749.html#msg668749

^Is that still happening?  Considering that the Fountain Square West thread hasn't been updated in 2 years, I figured it was dead.

From people who work with Towne it's still happening, it just doesn't have a schedule that would require updates yet. I've heard the only reason they announced so early in the process was to show a collaborative agreement that would keep Macy's Downtown. Otherwise it would have waited until they were closer to the project actually being something more than a concept.

 

All this with a grain of salt obviously. Second hand information has a way of changing.

My guess is that they can't get the numbers to work for the project.

I'm still suspicious that they're waiting until Macy's can duck out of the situation and then they'll demolish it and replace it with something bigger with no department store.  This is of course the Fountain Square West site where a 50+ story building almost broke ground in 1990-91. 

Macy's leaving downtown would be uhm, catastrophic (too strong). But Macy's is looking at things like converting the top floors of it's Herald Square flagship into condo.  I thought I had heard they did his with a Brooklyn store.  Not sure what their arrangement is with FSW but a similar tactic/exit seems part of the LT strategy.

Is it really a good tactical move to close a downtown store within spitting distance of your corporate headquarters?  It's one thing if there wasn't one there in the first place, though it's still pretty crappy *cough*Kroger*cough*.  Even though the convoluted corporate merger history only brought their headquarters here by accident, it'd still be a dick move.