July 17, 201410 yr A box is an engineer's best friend. Too many architects go super conservative because it's safe. The more I look at the Ascent, the more I appreciate it. Even though the GE building design is being revamped, you can't expect anything different than what we've already seen.
July 17, 201410 yr Did the developer/GE actually commit to switching up the exterior of the building somewhat?
July 17, 201410 yr The Enquirer want to know what WE want... Want a GE building that looks like this? So what do we want the building to look like, if not GE's vision? We offer these 18 office buildings from around the world for inspiration. Tell us what you think. Wow leave it to them to take it all the way to the other extreme just for clicks... They do know that the image they have of the Burj Kahlifa (163 stories) is actually the Burj Al Arab a sixty story resort hotel... I mean they have to know that right? (if not someone tell them http://www.emporis.com/building/burjalarab-dubai-unitedarabemirates) In short I was thoroughly disappointed, as most were, by the mere acceptance of what I assumed was done as a developer placeholder image by an employee who threw a sketchup model into a decent render software. Maybe what we were hoping for was a bit more like the Angelos Law Center, or KfW in Berlin, or the Arbil planned for Baghdad. Anything that would look responsive. Wow I like those buildings a lot! I think all would look good in that spot.
July 17, 201410 yr What about this? > link for more angles and images... http://www.archdaily.com/452040/post-site-aalst-abscis-architecten/5293f52ae8e44eba3c000097_post-site-aalst-abscis-architecten_foto-thomas-de-bruyne-abscis-aalst-28-jpg/
July 17, 201410 yr I'd love something with color and massing that's more interesting than a simple box. And something that emphasizes verticality other than horizontality. These megablock projects suffer from being really wide and the proportions are almost always off because of it. This can be combatted with vertical detailing and material selection that differentiates the facade from nearby buildings in Downtown which generally do a good job of emphasizing height over width.
July 17, 201410 yr Whether you like that design or not, it's being so over-used right now that it will soon be remembered as the fad of the early 2010s along with Dunnhumby and Mercer Commons.
July 17, 201410 yr Hey, it is better than Monroe@theBanks Yeah, that would require a couple flea markets, some low-budget hotels, prisoners, and a giant holy-roller church. Sounds like a good time though
July 17, 201410 yr Hey, it is better than Monroe@theBanks Yeah, that would require a couple flea markets, some low-budget hotels, prisoners, and a giant holy-roller church. Sounds like a good time though Maybe Holiday Inn could go to The Banks instead of 7th and Broadway, and we could get Hustler to relocate their Downtown store to The Banks as well.
July 23, 201410 yr Whether you like that design or not, it's being so over-used right now that it will soon be remembered as the fad of the early 2010s along with Dunnhumby and Mercer Commons. That style is just a mild refresher of the forms from the 1960's. Lots of staggered glass, boxy form, earth-tone colors.
July 23, 201410 yr A little love from the WSJ... A Power Surge in the Rust Belt GE to Move Jobs to Downtown Cincinnati By Chelsey Dulaney July 22, 2014 6:56 p.m. ET General Electric Co. GE -0.04% is about to strengthen its ties to downtown Cincinnati in the latest sign that urban centers in the Rust Belt are becoming more attractive to U.S. corporations. The company's link to Cincinnati dates back to 1948 when GE took over an abandoned aircraft-engine factory near the city. About 10 GE facilities now are located in the region, including the aviation unit that employed Jeff Immelt's father for nearly four decades. The future chief executive grew up in the city and was captain of the Finneytown High School football and basketball teams. But almost all of the GE jobs in the Cincinnati region have been in suburban locations. http://online.wsj.com/articles/general-electric-strengthens-ties-to-cincinnati-1406069795?KEYWORDS=cincinnati
July 23, 201410 yr Cincinnati's in the Rust Belt? This isn't the first and won't be the last we've been referenced in that regard... Soon it developed into the Factory Belt with its great American manufacturing cities: Chicago, Buffalo, Detroit, Milwaukee, Gary, Cincinnati, Toledo, Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, and Pittsburgh among others http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt
July 28, 201410 yr I wrote an opinion piece to the Enquirer regarding better designs downtown and it came out today. Have a look here: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/07/27/use-incentives-encourage-better-design/13256637/ Basically I'm suggesting tying strings to the money we give out in the form of tax incentives for prominent buildings. Rather than promising tax incentives and then being disappointed by the design, the incentives should be directly related (partly) in the design of the building. It would then be up to the company to design the building. New standards would be optional, but would push developers to build quality products. One example I can think of where this is used is in New York. Rather than taking property for public plazas or lacking public spaces, the city gives developers something they want (ability to build taller structures) if they agree to building publicly accessible spaces on their land. I realize there may be problems with the specifics of the New York example, but it would be a good example to build upon.
July 29, 201410 yr I wrote an opinion piece to the Enquirer regarding better designs downtown and it came out today. Have a look here: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/07/27/use-incentives-encourage-better-design/13256637/ Basically I'm suggesting tying strings to the money we give out in the form of tax incentives for prominent buildings. Rather than promising tax incentives and then being disappointed by the design, the incentives should be directly related (partly) in the design of the building. It would then be up to the company to design the building. New standards would be optional, but would push developers to build quality products. One example I can think of where this is used is in New York. Rather than taking property for public plazas or lacking public spaces, the city gives developers something they want (ability to build taller structures) if they agree to building publicly accessible spaces on their land. I realize there may be problems with the specifics of the New York example, but it would be a good example to build upon. Ryan, I read your piece yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I think perhaps Cincinnati was in a sort of "beggars can't be choosers" era until recently, but we certainly have earned enough clout to leverage certain concessions with these deals. Furthermore, I'm sure this has shown up before, but I was blown away today by the original concepts for the Banks (especially page 27): http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cityofcincinnati/linkservid/E51802CC-ABA4-4E1B-4F381D1B8765A704/showMeta/0/. Would have been a redefining "character neighborhood".
July 29, 201410 yr I wrote an opinion piece to the Enquirer regarding better designs downtown and it came out today. Have a look here: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/07/27/use-incentives-encourage-better-design/13256637/ Basically I'm suggesting tying strings to the money we give out in the form of tax incentives for prominent buildings. Rather than promising tax incentives and then being disappointed by the design, the incentives should be directly related (partly) in the design of the building. It would then be up to the company to design the building. New standards would be optional, but would push developers to build quality products. One example I can think of where this is used is in New York. Rather than taking property for public plazas or lacking public spaces, the city gives developers something they want (ability to build taller structures) if they agree to building publicly accessible spaces on their land. I realize there may be problems with the specifics of the New York example, but it would be a good example to build upon. Ryan, I read your piece yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I think perhaps Cincinnati was in a sort of "beggars can't be choosers" era until recently, but we certainly have earned enough clout to leverage certain concessions with these deals. Furthermore, I'm sure this has shown up before, but I was blown away today by the original concepts for the Banks (especially page 27): http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cityofcincinnati/linkservid/E51802CC-ABA4-4E1B-4F381D1B8765A704/showMeta/0/. Would have been a redefining "character neighborhood". ^-That rendering is part of the reason why we all feel so baited and switched on the design of the Banks as it stands :( Anyways, Ryan, you wrote a fantastic article, I hope it has some influence as Cincinnati's newer architecture should be as good as its old.
July 29, 201410 yr I'm personally glad we didn't get faux historic looking buildings, but the massing and scale is what's important. I also would like some more interaction with the street, less material choices and most importantly NO EIFS. EIFS should be illegal in Central Business Districts. In the PDF you posted is this guideline, " The exterior wall finish material on all facades shall be limited to brick, stone or cast stone designed to resemble stone masonry construction. The roof material shall be limited to slate, tile or metal." And as much as I don't like anything trying to look historic when its not (looks too much like Disneyland) if Banks phase 1 was limited to only those materials (plus glass) I think it would've been much more successful even with basically the same design.
July 29, 201410 yr It would be great if somebody built a pyramid shaped building on the riverfront. Porktown & Clevo would be kinda like bookends on the state.
July 29, 201410 yr Sadly, I think we’re going to start seeing even more EIFS in the next couple of decades. Energy codes are starting to favor continuous insulation even more so than they do already, and the easiest/cheapest way to get sufficient continuous insulation is to cover your entire building in Styrofoam, and roll on some fake stucco. As we’ve now seen with GE, even wealthy companies have lost almost all appreciation for architecture. That said, luckily downtown seems to be pretty free of EIFS currently, and hopefully it will stay that way. It doesn’t work quite as efficiently when you have lots of windows or want a curtain wall.
July 30, 201410 yr It would be great if somebody built a pyramid shaped building on the riverfront. Porktown & Clevo would be kinda like bookends on the state. Like the pyramid in Memphis? I'd be down ...
August 10, 201410 yr GE CINCINNATI - A NEW VISION REALIZING: "IMAGINATION AT WORK" After GE's new office building design for The Banks received a mediocre review from Cincinnati's Urban Design Review Board, I decided to create a vision of my own that would realize GE's slogan, "Imagination At Work". This vision represents the Italianate architecture with Art Deco influences that was a key part of The Banks conceptual design. These two styles are the architectural staples of downtown Cincinnati; and this new design builds a future that reflects Cincinnati's rich architectural history. The plan includes rooftop gardens, restaurants, urban vegetable farm, photo-voltaic solar arrays, and other sustainable features... Full Resolution PDF can be downloaded by clicking the following link: www (dot) daleyrenderings (dot) com/PDFs/GEPitch.pdf Hope you like it! ~ G
August 10, 201410 yr GE CINCINNATI - A NEW VISION REALIZING: "IMAGINATION AT WORK" After GE's new office building design for The Banks received a mediocre review from Cincinnati's Urban Design Review Board, I decided to create a vision of my own that would realize GE's slogan, "Imagination At Work". This vision represents the Italianate architecture with Art Deco influences that was a key part of The Banks conceptual design. These two styles are the architectural staples of downtown Cincinnati; and this new design builds a future that reflects Cincinnati's rich architectural history. Wow, it looks like you put a lot of work into that! I like it way more than GE's initial rendering.
August 11, 201410 yr Nice job, though I'm sure the building would be too tall for that dingbat Mike Brown :x
August 11, 201410 yr Looks good but does it take into consideration the preferred open floorplan that GE would be looking to implement. Also, would it come in according to budget? It is a lot easy to design a dynamic building when we are not the ones paying for it.
August 11, 201410 yr Really cool design! One possible caveat is GE might not want to share this space due to security, legal, or logistical concerns. (Other than maybe a street level Cafe or something.). The idea of a really tall Italianate style building is interesting. Does anyone know what the tallest Italianate in town is? I think there will be at least one change to the design coming. Chris Wetterich's Biz Journal article about the original design review states: "GE’s logo will be on the south face of the building, visible as drivers come into Cincinnati from Northern Kentucky." But this is not shown in the South Elevation (fourth pic of slide show: http://m.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/07/09/ge-building-design-gets-thumbs-down-from-review.html?r=full ) www.cincinnatiideas.com
August 11, 201410 yr Does anyone know what the tallest Italianate in town is? The Alms and Doepke Building (Central & Main) came to mind, but according to Wikipedia, it's Late Victorian, not Italianate.
August 17, 201410 yr Banks developers face deadline, could lose control of hotel site Tom Demeropolis Reporter- Cincinnati Business Courier If the developers of the Banks don’t start on a hotel or the office project in phase I-B by May 23, 2015, they could lose control of those development sites. Under the master development agreement between the city of Cincinnati, Hamilton County and the developers, Carter and the Dawson Co. along with lead equity partner USAA Real Estate Co., the developers are able to pay extension fees to keep the development rights for the phase I-B sites. On May 23, 2013, the developers paid their first extension fee of $250,000. Then, on May 23, 2014, they paid a second extension fee of $500,000. Those extension fees are paid to the city and the county, going toward $2 million the developers owe for infrastructure improvements to the site. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/08/15/banks-developers-face-deadline-could-lose-control.html?page=all
August 18, 201410 yr Bold prediction: The city will not allow Carter/Dawson to have another extension, and 3CDC will be brought in to develop the hotel and office pads.
August 18, 201410 yr Bold prediction: The city will not allow Carter/Dawson to have another extension, and 3CDC will be brought in to develop the hotel and office pads. I think they will allow extensions until the $2M is recouped.
August 18, 201410 yr Am I the only one that wants them to not get an extension? I feel that 3CDC and local developers could do a much better job. I mean, it's pretty easy to one-up some of the worst architecture in the city.
August 27, 201410 yr Speculation on new office tower at The Banks: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/cincinnati-s-largest-law-firm-hunting-for-new.html?ana=e_cinci_bn_breakingnews&u=rBKE+NOdDo%2FOyZEQt5nc3JP0aD2&t=1409156629&page=2
August 27, 201410 yr Speculation on new office tower at The Banks: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/cincinnati-s-largest-law-firm-hunting-for-new.html?ana=e_cinci_bn_breakingnews&u=rBKE+NOdDo%2FOyZEQt5nc3JP0aD2&t=1409156629&page=2 That article mentioned that a number of firms already located downtown are looking to expand, which could result in a new tower. However they also mentioned that some companies are looking to move downtown, so that might keep demand high for the existing buildings as well.
August 27, 201410 yr Does anyone know why exactly the block at Vine and 3rd, probably the most prominent location on the skyline, just sits empty decade after decade?
August 27, 201410 yr Speculation on new office tower at The Banks: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/cincinnati-s-largest-law-firm-hunting-for-new.html?ana=e_cinci_bn_breakingnews&u=rBKE+NOdDo%2FOyZEQt5nc3JP0aD2&t=1409156629&page=2 That article mentioned that a number of firms already located downtown are looking to expand, which could result in a new tower. However they also mentioned that some companies are looking to move downtown, so that might keep demand high for the existing buildings as well. They will not go to 309 Vine and I really cant see them at the banks. Chiquita Center is a possibility but I think they are holding out for a new tower by W&S. They need to be near P&G and I think with a couple of their chief competitors in QCS, they want a brand new premier office tower for themselves too.
August 28, 201410 yr Does anyone know why exactly the block at Vine and 3rd, probably the most prominent location on the skyline, just sits empty decade after decade? Great question.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower. Class B office space, even with a view, is irrelevant to the class A office market. Especially with a view. Also, two levels of car park = empty use in a CBD.
August 28, 201410 yr Speculation on new office tower at The Banks: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/cincinnati-s-largest-law-firm-hunting-for-new.html?ana=e_cinci_bn_breakingnews&u=rBKE+NOdDo%2FOyZEQt5nc3JP0aD2&t=1409156629&page=2 That article mentioned that a number of firms already located downtown are looking to expand, which could result in a new tower. However they also mentioned that some companies are looking to move downtown, so that might keep demand high for the existing buildings as well. They will not go to 309 Vine and I really cant see them at the banks. Chiquita Center is a possibility but I think they are holding out for a new tower by W&S. They need to be near P&G and I think with a couple of their chief competitors in QCS, they want a brand new premier office tower for themselves too. edited - didn't really add anything.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower. Class B office space, even with a view, is irrelevant to the class A office market. Especially with a view. Also, two levels of car park = empty use in a CBD. 1 - That is why 309 Vine is not really an option but was just floated out there as large enough to accommodate them. 2 - 2 levels of park is not empty use. It may be in your opinion, but you do not own the property and to the owner, it is not empty use. Given that the owner owns the tower behind it, they do not have incentive to develop something that would block the view of their other tower, especially since the parking revenues they generate from that place are pretty strong.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower. Class B office space, even with a view, is irrelevant to the class A office market. Especially with a view. Also, two levels of car park = empty use in a CBD. <b>...the parking revenues they generate from that place are pretty strong.</b> You're familiar with their financials? From the POV of a dense, urban center, a 2-level parking deck is a lower use - maybe not empty - but since it sits void of people, just as holding for cars, while the largest parking garage in the region sits 2 blocks away, it's only a matter of time before the site is redeveloped with a higher use. A mid-rise commercial/retail space would be better, and would not detract from views significantly.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower. Class B office space, even with a view, is irrelevant to the class A office market. Especially with a view. Also, two levels of car park = empty use in a CBD. 1 - That is why 309 Vine is not really an option but was just floated out there as large enough to accommodate them. 2 - 2 levels of park is not empty use. It may be in your opinion, but you do not own the property and to the owner, it is not empty use. Given that the owner owns the tower behind it, they do not have incentive to develop something that would block the view of their other tower, especially since the parking revenues they generate from that place are pretty strong. Maybe if it were more than 2 levels, but it isn't. It's like 180 spaces on that corner, and that's paying a valet to double-park them. Queen City Square sits on 2,250 parking spaces. So parking revenue couldn't really be it. Also, your assertion that they would be blocking their older tower kind of treats it like a liability, don't you think? I don't think that developers think that way. I think they would readily block 20 stories of Class B to get 50 stories of new Class A.
August 28, 201410 yr ^ I know I've mentioned this in other threads, but the owners of such a garage/lot SHOULD have an incentive to develop that property more fully, but since our property tax code rewards land banking, depreciation, and marginal uses through vastly lower assessments, they can sit on such property and not be penalized for it. That's a bad thing from not only an urbanistic standpoint, but also from a city financial perspective. These underutilized downtown properties have, quite literally, millions of dollars of public infrastructure serving them, yet they're paying a pittance in taxes and essentially getting a free ride on the backs of everyone else.
August 28, 201410 yr Vine and third is not empty it is the Olympic Auto Park. This is owned by AFG who owns that entire block. It will not be developed into a high rise because they own the Provident Tower on 4th and Vine which would then have its view blocked. I think the reference to 3rd and Vine was for 309 Vine, the low rise building in front of the 4th and Vine Tower. Class B office space, even with a view, is irrelevant to the class A office market. Especially with a view. Also, two levels of car park = empty use in a CBD. 1 - That is why 309 Vine is not really an option but was just floated out there as large enough to accommodate them. 2 - 2 levels of park is not empty use. It may be in your opinion, but you do not own the property and to the owner, it is not empty use. Given that the owner owns the tower behind it, they do not have incentive to develop something that would block the view of their other tower, especially since the parking revenues they generate from that place are pretty strong. Maybe if it were more than 2 levels, but it isn't. It's like 180 spaces on that corner, and that's paying a valet to double-park them. Queen City Square sits on 2,250 parking spaces. So parking revenue couldn't really be it. Also, your assertion that they would be blocking their older tower kind of treats it like a liability, don't you think? I don't think that developers think that way. I think they would readily block 20 stories of Class B to get 50 stories of new Class A. First I do not disagree with you that it is not the highest and best use of the place, but I do not own the property so my opinion about it (like yours) is pretty irrelevant in the matter. As far as developing the property into a tower, who knows what their priorities are and risk threshold. They have owned the block for a long time and are content with the cash flows it throws off. If they developed it, it could do much better but they would have to take on additional risk to do so, second, they may have other higher better projects elsewhere where they choose to devote that capital. I like everyone would love to see a 50 story high rise there but until AFG decides they want one there or they want to sell the property, their opinion is the only one that matters.
August 28, 201410 yr ^ I know I've mentioned this in other threads, but the owners of such a garage/lot SHOULD have an incentive to develop that property more fully, but since our property tax code rewards land banking, depreciation, and marginal uses through vastly lower assessments, they can sit on such property and not be penalized for it. That's a bad thing from not only an urbanistic standpoint, but also from a city financial perspective. These underutilized downtown properties have, quite literally, millions of dollars of public infrastructure serving them, yet they're paying a pittance in taxes and essentially getting a free ride on the backs of everyone else. Supply and demand determine what is the highest and best use for the property coupled with the capital the developer is willing to commit to a project.
Create an account or sign in to comment