I like that you linked to a project in the Meatpacking District in Manhattan (the second photo). The general character they should have gone for at The Banks would have ideally been similar to a lot of the modern infill in MePa. It is thoroughly contextual with the industrial nature of the historic buildings but so modern that there is no mistaking it for an old building. No faux historicism, but completely contextual. That kind of modern industrial infill would have felt awesome along Cincy's riverfront.

 

Good eye jmicha. With regard to infill - the project you reference Samsung's Store & Offices at 837 Washington - is how I believe good infill should work. I would apply the same principles to OTR or the West End. I know The Banks renders & vision changed to a decidedly modern feel from the original faux industrial Baltimore Inner Harbor knockoffs we saw at the beginning, and that is a good thing.  But I do not feel they have been achieving that vision, as they have pandered to some imaginary contingent that they think will be satisfied because there are multiple colors of brick. 

 

I included the Boston Seaport because that type of Class A building is what you want on your city's front door. It is taller then what has been shown for The Banks but I think this is necessary to blend the area into the 2nd street wall of buildings. 

 

I vaguely remember the Bengals having some sort of height veto on the neighboring buildings to PBS does that ring a bell for anyone else?

The Bengals waived height restrictions at The Banks in April. In exchange, the county and the Bengals negotiated six Paul Brown Stadium upgrades, some of which the Bengals themselves will pay for despite their lease requiring taxpayers to foot the bill.

 

 

The agreement includes:

 

    A new scoreboard: It's expected to cost $10 million, of which the Bengals will pay $2.5 million. If the price jumps to $12 million, the team will pay 25 percent of the additional $2 million. But the deal caps any spending at $12 million. If it's any more than that, the deal is nixed.

   

    A new locker room: The county is allowing the team to expand its locker room into a space that had been set aside in case a professional soccer team came to Cincinnati. If soccer should come, the team will give up space elsewhere comparable to the expansion. The Bengals will pay for the expansion.

 

    Wi-Fi: The stadium will be outfitted with Wi-Fi, as required by the NFL. Taxpayers will pay $3 million of the $3.5 million project, although the Bengals are paying the entire cost up front and then will be reimbursed by the county over five years.

 

    Permission to play international games: The county is allowing the team to play two international games as the "home" team. The lease calls for the county to profit from tickets and parking during all home games, which won't be possible if the Bengals play outside the county. The team can play those games during any five consecutive one-year periods.

 

    Parking: The Bengals will get back more than 100 spots the team lost when Cincinnati Parks began using the area as they built the new riverfront park. The land will eventually be a park, but for the 2014 season some of it will revert back to high-priced spots for tailgating.

 

    A Club Lounge refurbish: The club lounges, which can be rented for events and have riverfront views, are getting $1 million in new furniture, which the Bengals will buy. The current furniture is original to the stadium, which opened in 2000.

^Thanks Cygnus.

 

IMO something 17-25 stories (250-350 feet) tall would really do well anchoring western part of The Banks/blending it into the CBD.

The GE building is the Andy Dalton of architecture

 

Shift the color scheme and The Ascent could be Gumby. 

 

I don't ever foresee them building anything much if any taller then the GE building at the banks.  But one can dream.

I don't ever foresee them building anything much if any taller then the GE building at the banks.  But one can dream.

Agreed.  As mentioned by other UO posters, undoubtedly there's a powerful business oligarchy determined to keep their own precious 3rd/4th Street views intact.

Opening sometime this month...

 

Monday – Friday: 4:00 p.m. – Close

Saturday – Sunday: 11:30 a.m. – Close

 

 

Wow, I love the comments about the blandness of the GE Building. The new GE Building looks straight out of DC. And not a good straight out of DC. There are a few nice new buildings, especially in NoMA, but most buildings are boxes. Hooray Height Act! The GE Building is a bland box. Par for DC, not Cincinnati. For shame.

Driving by Radius today, you can really get a sense that it is much better looking than the first Banks apartments.  I don't know if it is materials or color scheme or what, but it is much more appealing to me. 

Demo is well underway at the former Johnny Rockets / future The Stretch location.

 

And unfortunately it appears that Toby Keith's awful looking awning will be staying...

Driving by Radius today, you can really get a sense that it is much better looking than the first Banks apartments.  I don't know if it is materials or color scheme or what, but it is much more appealing to me.

 

No I have to disagree, from the contractor grade railings, to the bland and boring windows and lighting. Lets not forget the combination hardy board and EIFS. No thanks tired of seeing it everywhere. People might dislike phase one but at least there was quality building materials, glass railings, and higher end touches throughout. The shape of the radius is nice but it looks like it was value engineered like crazy. Urban Design Review board continued to rip the design even though it got pushed through to construction.

Stairwell at Phase IIIA:

Won't that stairwell be "underground" once the rest is filled in (west of Race St)?

 

The colors remind me of the temporary "decorative" panels they put up on the stairs before GE and Radius buildings were constructed. IMHO, it would look better to just leave it bare until the next phase is built.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0978781,-84.5126168,3a,89.7y,159.75h,91.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sVN4ern4Dyy1WaiII9iTGIg!2e0!5s20121001T000000!7i13312!8i6656

 

Who's ready for some drinks by the bucket?!

Who's ready for some drinks by the bucket?!

 

Just waiting for someone to open an OU-themed bar.  They could import "The Aquarium" from Pawpurr's. 

Howl at the Moon apparently didn't care for the building's exterior colors and are painting...

 

Hahaha

Who's ready for some drinks by the bucket?!

 

Just waiting for someone to open an OU-themed bar.  They could import "The Aquarium" from Pawpurr's. 

 

Columbus and Cincinnati could both use those. Act like you do at OU, but close to jobs.

Sounds like the UC law school may not come to the banks. Board is any a special meeting now.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/08/24/uc-pull-plug-law-school-banks/89270244/

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was the best decision for UC keeping the law school on campus.

You love defending the status quo don't you.

Huge opportunity missed by UC.  Not shocking but still disappointing that with Ono leaving the school moves back to simply keeping status quo. 

Though I agree it would have been a great move for UC to have more of a presence Downtown, as far as The Banks is concerned this is probably the better option in the long run. The plans UC showed were questionable at best. It didn't appear they had any intention of maximizing whatever block they were on which is contradictory to what really needs to happen in The Banks for it to be successful. More residents and workers will be able to be squeezed in with traditional development than what was planned by UC. So that's the silver lining I guess.

I never thought the move the Banks was a good idea because it would be a waste of high value high public investment tax dollars.

 

Moving to a downtown parking lot near the courthouse, or a rehabbed Dennison would make more sense.

 

You love defending the status quo don't you.

 

No, when it is a good Idea, I am all for it. It was better to keep it on campus to integrate with the undergrads better. It is better to keep it in Clifton to spur development there too. Bringing 300 law students to the banks will not do much for jobs etc. THe law firms are going to hire them anyway whether they are at Clifton or the Banks. It is not that far form downtown at main campus. Students do not have the disposable income to afford the apartments at the Banks and the ones who do have that will live there anyway.  It is the best decision to keep it on campus.  As an alum I felt this was the right decision

Personally, I think UC's Law going to the Banks would have been a good move, but it's not a heartbreaker. My opinions are; (1) they would have a huge say-so in extending the streetcar to Uptown & (2) placing that amount of younger students on the Riverfront would pay off more so with their impression of the area and businesses that would cater to them. This would then be uploaded to social media.

I think The Banks will be better off in the long run if we continue to build it out with a mix of office space, residential, retail, bars and restaurants. The Law School idea didn't make sense to me -- it either should've been located near the Court House or remain on the Uptown campus. We also need to resist the idea of building more infrequently-used attractions at The Banks like the music venue that was suggested a few months back.

I think The Banks will be better off in the long run if we continue to build it out with a mix of office space, residential, retail, bars and restaurants. The Law School idea didn't make sense to me -- it either should've been located near the Court House or remain on the Uptown campus. We also need to resist the idea of building more infrequently-used attractions at The Banks like the music venue that was suggested a few months back.

 

Agreed.  I always thought the Banks location for the law school was forced.  That massive parking lot at 12th, Sycamore & Elliot Street is one of any number of better possible locations in the Basin.

I was pretty happy to hear it was killed going to the Banks.  I think the more residents we can add to the Banks the better.  With GE moving in (have workers already moved into the new office, btw?) there is going to be higher demand for downtown residences.  Also, that area is going to continue to keep booming with the PNC Annex going through to residents, 4th and Race, and the other rehabs that will continue to move forward on 4th Street.  I am OK with the Banks being a mixed use of office, residential and retail / bars.  I never thought it would be a good place for the UC Law School.

 

That said, I thought building the UC Law School some place downtown would be a big plus to help get the streetcar uptown.  It looks like that ship has sailed though...

GE employees move into their new office in September.

IMO we need to be unabashedly cramming as much residential space as possible into the remaining area at the Banks : https://cincinnatiideas.wordpress.com/the-banks-phase-3/

 

I never thought the move the Banks was a good idea because it would be a waste of high value high public investment tax dollars.

 

Moving to a downtown parking lot near the courthouse, or a rehabbed Dennison would make more sense.

 

I really like this idea. What if the law school "campus" was built on the Joseph's parking lot and we got a rehabbed Dennison out of the deal (as office space or housing.) it would be near the courthouse and businesses downtown, and if the streetcar goes through the Mt Auburn Tunnel it would get up to Main Campus from there in like 5-10 minutes.

^I like that too.  But between the Emery Theater, Christy's, and many other situations both directly and tangentially related to UC, it has become very apparent that respecting historic architecture is not one of UC's strong suits.

Not to mention what they did to Tangeman University Center...

Not to mention what they did to Tangeman University Center...

 

Van Wermer. Wilson Auditorium. Giveth and taketh.

I just think the law school at the Banks would not have been a big enough benefit to UC. Besides some of the points I mentioned earlier, also remember at main campus, UC owns the land, they own the parking, and they have a lot of influence over what goes in the immediate neighborhood around campus. Moving downtown, they now become a tenant, they will not get the parking revenue from students, and have less of a say regarding corresponding development in the area. I thought the idea of moving to the Banks was a good idea for the Banks, but less so for UC.

UC's building is unstylish but so is Chase's building, which is its only competitor in the region.  I think UC was thinking that if they got downtown or near the courthouse that they could offer a feature that NKU could never match simply by virtue of being in Kentucky and having no major county courthouse.  But I think most law students are smart enough to realize that none of that really matters. 

Capital is in Downtown CBUS and I think that definitely adds to the draw of their school, however, would it really be better for the students?

 

My intern is planning on going to law school and he admitted that if it were on the banks, he would fee pressured to live down there which would be a disservice to him since he would be paying for it with loans. The lower cost of living in Clifton is more beneficial to the students, many of whom will have loans well over $150k when they graduate. Saving a few thousand a year on living expenses would be a prudent thing.

The Business Courier has some photos of Howl at the Moon / Splitsville prior to their opening tomorrow: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/08/25/get-a-sneak-peek-inside-the-banks-newest-addition.html

The cost of living Uptown can be more expensive than The Banks, though. University Park Apartments is charging $4000 per semester per student for a two-bedroom, two-bath unit. I'm not sure when the move in & move out dates are, but considering each semester is approximately 4 months, that's roughly $2000/month to rent one of those apartments ($1000 per student per month × two residents). The Banks has some two-bed, two-bath units listed at $1,841 right now.

The cost of living Uptown can be more expensive than The Banks, though. University Park Apartments is charging $4000 per semester per student for a two-bedroom, two-bath unit. I'm not sure when the move in & move out dates are, but considering each semester is approximately 4 months, that's roughly $2000/month to rent one of those apartments ($1000 per student per month × two residents). The Banks has some two-bed, two-bath units listed at $1,841 right now.

 

Law students typically don't live in those places. There may be a few, but typically, the law students live in the Gaslight area, some live in Clifton Heights and Corryville. There are also a decent amount that live in Hyde Park, Oakley and Mt. Lookout, and a few that commute from parents houses, etc. The places you sight cater to undergrads, grad students tend to be a bit more price conscious in general and do not have the same tie to campus as undergrad does. Many do prefer to live in the area as long as they can find something on their budget and you can still do that in Clifton, especially in the gas light area.

The cost of living Uptown can be more expensive than The Banks, though. University Park Apartments is charging $4000 per semester per student for a two-bedroom, two-bath unit. I'm not sure when the move in & move out dates are, but considering each semester is approximately 4 months, that's roughly $2000/month to rent one of those apartments ($1000 per student per month × two residents). The Banks has some two-bed, two-bath units listed at $1,841 right now.

 

Law students typically don't live in those places. There may be a few, but typically, the law students live in the Gaslight area, some live in Clifton Heights and Corryville. There are also a decent amount that live in Hyde Park, Oakley and Mt. Lookout, and a few that commute from parents houses, etc. The places you sight cater to undergrads, grad students tend to be a bit more price conscious in general and do not have the same tie to campus as undergrad does. Many do prefer to live in the area as long as they can find something on their budget and you can still do that in Clifton, especially in the gas light area.

 

I can honestly say that in my 3 years at UC Law, I didn't know a single person who lived in the Gaslight area.  Not that people don't, but generally folks lived everywhere--and I do mean everywhere.  Northern Kentucky, Colerain, Anderson, Kenwood, Fairfield--it was all over the map. 

 

Partially this is because the Law School is essentially completely disconnected from the rest of the University.  Someone mentioned "integrating" with the rest of campus earlier, but there's not much integration to happen.  Unless you are getting some kind of combined degree (which was also extremely rare, in my experience) you would very rarely go on to the "main" campus, and you certainly never took a class there.  I'd guess that in my 3 years there, I went somewhere else on UC's campus approximately 8 times in total.  It's a pretty self-contained experience. 

 

That said, I don't necessarily have a strong opinion on where a new law school should be located--but I think a new facility is definitely needed.  UC Law would like to compete with Top 50 law schools--it was in the Top 50 in the 90s and early 2000s before dropping in the rankings--and an up-to-date, modern facility will help do that. 

The cost of living Uptown can be more expensive than The Banks, though. University Park Apartments is charging $4000 per semester per student for a two-bedroom, two-bath unit. I'm not sure when the move in & move out dates are, but considering each semester is approximately 4 months, that's roughly $2000/month to rent one of those apartments ($1000 per student per month × two residents). The Banks has some two-bed, two-bath units listed at $1,841 right now.

 

Law students typically don't live in those places. There may be a few, but typically, the law students live in the Gaslight area, some live in Clifton Heights and Corryville. There are also a decent amount that live in Hyde Park, Oakley and Mt. Lookout, and a few that commute from parents houses, etc. The places you sight cater to undergrads, grad students tend to be a bit more price conscious in general and do not have the same tie to campus as undergrad does. Many do prefer to live in the area as long as they can find something on their budget and you can still do that in Clifton, especially in the gas light area.

 

I can honestly say that in my 3 years at UC Law, I didn't know a single person who lived in the Gaslight area.  Not that people don't, but generally folks lived everywhere--and I do mean everywhere.  Northern Kentucky, Colerain, Anderson, Kenwood, Fairfield--it was all over the map. 

 

Partially this is because the Law School is essentially completely disconnected from the rest of the University.  Someone mentioned "integrating" with the rest of campus earlier, but there's not much integration to happen.  Unless you are getting some kind of combined degree (which was also extremely rare, in my experience) you would very rarely go on to the "main" campus, and you certainly never took a class there.  I'd guess that in my 3 years there, I went somewhere else on UC's campus approximately 8 times in total.  It's a pretty self-contained experience. 

 

That said, I don't necessarily have a strong opinion on where a new law school should be located--but I think a new facility is definitely needed.  UC Law would like to compete with Top 50 law schools--it was in the Top 50 in the 90s and early 2000s before dropping in the rankings--and an up-to-date, modern facility will help do that. 

 

A new building will help some (Dayton has a new building and it has not really helped their rankings). The reason why the rankings have dropped is because they lost a number of well published professors to other schools. When they were in the top 50 in 2001-2003 time frame, they had a top Crim Law prof who left for AZ State. They had a very good Tax Prof who went to Pepperdine in the late 2000's as well as a highly regarded Securities Professor. When you lose them your ranking suffers.

That and there is a serious glut of graduates who are finding out that those mythical high-paying jobs that schools were touting existed... in fact do not exist in large quantities. There has been a drop in enrollment for the law school at the University of Kentucky - which only ten years ago was bursting at the seams. The university then was proposing a massive new law school complex, quietly dropping it in favor of a small expansion and rehabilitation project of its existing facility.

That and there is a serious glut of graduates who are finding out that those mythical high-paying jobs that schools were touting existed... in fact do not exist in large quantities. There has been a drop in enrollment for the law school at the University of Kentucky - which only ten years ago was bursting at the seams. The university then was proposing a massive new law school complex, quietly dropping it in favor of a small expansion and rehabilitation project of its existing facility.

 

UC was the same 10 years ago (not a massive complex but they here debating the new building back then). Back in law school I did research for a professor who wrote on the rankings game and ultimately determined the #1 most significant way to change your ranking was to get professors who had a high pedigree, so there became an arms race for them. THe schools that had the most upward movement were the ones with the profs who got published in the right journals. While infrastructure, LSAT and alumni had a say in the rankings, the biggest driver again was the professor pedigree. Unfortunately, UC did a good job at developing them but were not able to retain them long term which is why the reputation suffered.

 

The market changed and law school was no longer the huge profit center for universities that it was 10-20 years ago and probably never will be. What UC does right is that it is a small size and purposely keeps itself smaller which helps its reputation.

The cost of living Uptown can be more expensive than The Banks, though. University Park Apartments is charging $4000 per semester per student for a two-bedroom, two-bath unit. I'm not sure when the move in & move out dates are, but considering each semester is approximately 4 months, that's roughly $2000/month to rent one of those apartments ($1000 per student per month × two residents). The Banks has some two-bed, two-bath units listed at $1,841 right now.

 

Law students typically don't live in those places. There may be a few, but typically, the law students live in the Gaslight area, some live in Clifton Heights and Corryville. There are also a decent amount that live in Hyde Park, Oakley and Mt. Lookout, and a few that commute from parents houses, etc. The places you sight cater to undergrads, grad students tend to be a bit more price conscious in general and do not have the same tie to campus as undergrad does. Many do prefer to live in the area as long as they can find something on their budget and you can still do that in Clifton, especially in the gas light area.

 

I can honestly say that in my 3 years at UC Law, I didn't know a single person who lived in the Gaslight area.  Not that people don't, but generally folks lived everywhere--and I do mean everywhere.  Northern Kentucky, Colerain, Anderson, Kenwood, Fairfield--it was all over the map. 

 

Partially this is because the Law School is essentially completely disconnected from the rest of the University.  Someone mentioned "integrating" with the rest of campus earlier, but there's not much integration to happen.  Unless you are getting some kind of combined degree (which was also extremely rare, in my experience) you would very rarely go on to the "main" campus, and you certainly never took a class there.  I'd guess that in my 3 years there, I went somewhere else on UC's campus approximately 8 times in total.  It's a pretty self-contained experience. 

 

That said, I don't necessarily have a strong opinion on where a new law school should be located--but I think a new facility is definitely needed.  UC Law would like to compete with Top 50 law schools--it was in the Top 50 in the 90s and early 2000s before dropping in the rankings--and an up-to-date, modern facility will help do that. 

 

A new building will help some (Dayton has a new building and it has not really helped their rankings). The reason why the rankings have dropped is because they lost a number of well published professors to other schools. When they were in the top 50 in 2001-2003 time frame, they had a top Crim Law prof who left for AZ State. They had a very good Tax Prof who went to Pepperdine in the late 2000's as well as a highly regarded Securities Professor. When you lose them your ranking suffers.

 

If you're talking about Professor Caron, he was there up until 2014-2015.  (He had been a visiting professor away from UC before that; pretty sure the invite to his farewell reception was 2014.)   

^ I was not sure when he left as I lost touch for a while. I always thought is was before then, but time flies. I vaguely remember an invite but was unable to make it obviously.

He created a nice niche. 

There's a ribbon cutting ceremony for The Banks Phase IIIA today. Which is just a garage. No word on development on top yet.

Enquirer didn't bother to send a photographer 3 blocks to the ribbon cutting...reporter took iphone photo out of Enquirer office window:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2016/09/01/banks-infrastructure-development/89711224/