Ah OK...makes sense.  Thats good because it will make the giant mud pit disappear even faster.  It's going to be strange seeing views of the riverfront without the giant mud pit.  But at the same time I think we can all give a sigh of relief.  Now all we need is to plan something awesome for Broadway Commons.  That's a giant cement no-man's land.  Is there a thread for that?

I remember my very first impression of Cincinnati.  I have this hobby where I pick a new city every week and study it.  I look up photos, parks, malls, transit systems, city development sites, maps, etc.  I've been doing this for years.  I picked Cincinnati the summer between my Junior and Senior years of high school.  Having no vision in mind of what the city looked like, I googled it.  The first image that came up was of the skyline and the Ohio river.  My eyes immediately went to the giant mud pit.  After doing a little more research I came to the conclusion that Cincinnatians must've HATED the Ohio River.  I mean, what city in their right mind would build a freeway, three stadiums, a mud pit, and a sea of parking lots between it's CBD and it's greatest natural resource. 

I had a friend that had gone to an internship at the Cincinnati Zoo, so she would bring the topic of Cincy to the table regularly.  And every time she did, I would say, "yeah it looks like a great city, except they completely destroyed their connection with the river.  It's a shame really." 

That went on for a couple of months until I took an impromptu road trip to Indianapolis one night.  I got bored with that city really quick, so I decided to go check out the mud pit at Cincinnati.  (Seriously, that was my reason for visiting, to go laugh at the riverfront.)  Luckily, I took the I-275 loop first, so that my very first real life exposure was through the cut-in-the-hill.  I almost caused an accident because the skyline was incredibly beautiful from that view.  The second I arrived, I completely forgot about the shameful riverfront and became absorbed by this city's beauty.  I have been hopelessly obsessed ever since.  And all my acquaintances here in Milwaukee will tell you that I won't shut up about Cincinnati. 

 

I am so thrilled to see this happen. 

^Very cool story

Even after the flashy groundbreaking, questions remain for The Banks project

Are we there yet?

BY LUCY MAY & DAN MONK | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

April 4, 2008

 

DOWNTOWN - Golden shovels and fireworks notwithstanding, a number of important loose ends remain when it comes to building the Banks development on Cincinnati's central riverfront. As Cincinnati City Councilman Chris Bortz put it just hours before the project's highly anticipated April 2 groundbreaking: "There's not even a signed deal yet."

 

Hamilton County doesn't yet have a final development agreement with Atlanta-based developers Carter and the Harold A. Dawson Co. And that's because the developers have yet to submit final financing documents to the city and county. The developers have gotten a couple extensions on the financing because of the lousy credit market, and signed documents are due by month's end.

Hmmm, imagine that, on a giant project there are still loose ends, *gasp*  You would think that these people think projects like this are only secure if theres 100s of millions in minty fresh $100 bills locked in the vault somewhere.

I perceived that article as saying, "things are looking pretty good, but we can't slack off now and let some loose ends prevent this from materializing."  Totally a practical way of thinking. 

Yeah, I get that too, I just question the need for that article.  It just says "things look like any other project of this scale at this stage"

I'm with hohum on this one (predictably).

That article was written by someone who clearly STILL doesn't think it will be built and doesn't want to see it built.  Just ignore the major skeptics, they're a waste of time.

The weird thing is that the Business Courier usually sticks with just the facts and tends to stray away from the sensationalism that the other media outlets embrace.  In addition to that, I have grown to like Dan Monk's work quite a bit.  I was really thrown off when I saw that he had input on this one.

Well in addition to this article and the loose ends, do you expect any physical construction to start before June? or do more of those "loose" ends have to be secured before the bulldozers move in?

 

From DCN: Toronto ...

 

 

Apr. 15, 2008

The Banks project gets underway in Cincinnati

Apartments, retail comprise first phase of US$600-million Banks development

Cincinnati

Ground has been broken on The Banks, an 18-acre, US$600 million mixed-use development on the Ohio River in Downtown Cincinnati, according to a recent story in Commercial Property News.

The initial part of the project’s first phase consists of about 300 apartments and 70,000 square feet of retail and restaurants; construction is scheduled for completion in 2010. A spokesperson for the project told CPN that there is no retail preleasing yet, and that the retail will focus on “eatertainment” and on support retail for the residents.

The Banks’ master developer is Riverbanks Renaissance L.L.C., a joint venture of Carter & Associates Commercial Services L.L.C. and The Dawson Co., both of which are headquartered in Atlanta. The two companies will also handle project management for the construction of additional public infrastructure.

The US$74 million needed to finance Phase 1A will be provided by a US$40 million senior debt financing commitment from National City Bank, a US$10 million debt financing commitment from the Cincinnati Equity Fund, US$12 million in equity funding led by Carter, Dawson and their investors, and US$12 million in grant funding from the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County for the residential portion of the project.

Subject to contingencies, the second part of Phase I will include an office building of at least 200,000 square feet and possibly a hotel. The private investment for phase 1B is estimated at about US$75 million.

Although the particulars of subsequent phases remain flexible, they could total 1 million to 1.8 million square feet of apartments and residential condos; 200,000 to 1 million square feet of office space; 200,000 to 400,000 square feet of restaurants, bars, and other retail; hotel development of 200,000 to 400,000 square feet; and parking for nearly 1,800 cars.

The Banks also includes a 40-acre riverfront park that will include playgrounds, a 12-acre “great lawn,” walking and biking paths, gardens, and a promenade overlooking the entire park. A focal point of the area is the existing National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, a museum and educational center.

The entire site is bookended by Cincinnati’s two major stadiums: the Bengals’ Paul Brown Stadium, which opened in 2000, and the Reds’ Great American Ball Park, which opened in 2003.

CPN reported in February that, according to a report by Property & Portfolio Research Inc., Cincinnati has one of the country’s highest major market office vacancy rates. An 11 per cent increase in office construction in Cincinnati this year should add 1.8 million square feet to the city’s office space supply, pushing the office vacancy rate to about 20 percent by the end of 2009.

DCN News Services

 

 

http://dcnonl.com/article/id27245

 

Cinergy Field soon to be erased

BY THE ENQUIRER

DOWNTOWN -- Heavy machinery will be moving in for the Banks project in a matter of days. The 2.8 million-square-foot riverfront development got started April 2. By Monday - maybe earlier - crews will be demolishing the old Cinergy Field foundations.

 

The $698,900 demolition contract was awarded to Evans Landscaping Inc. and is about $572,000 less than expected because the company is recycling the concrete.

 

Site preparation will be finished by June. In early July, construction begins on a 1,478-space parking garage.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080415/NEWS01/804150402/1056/COL02

^ awesome!

Fantastic news.  Is the old foundation those posts that are underneath the Red's Hall of Fame? you can see them if you look at the property from the side.

The $698,900 demolition contract was awarded to Evans Landscaping Inc. and is about $572,000 less than expected because the company is recycling the concrete.

 

If that turns out to be true, it will be the first time in my recollection that a construction project came in under budget.

^^almost 50% under!

I'm sure most have seen this but if you want to watch the construction live in real time..just follow this link and be sure to bookmark it.

 

http://207.250.90.73/view/index.shtml

http://207.250.90.73/view/index.shtml is so cool, consider it bookmarked

I'm sure most have seen this but if you want to watch the construction live in real time..just follow this link and be sure to bookmark it.

 

http://207.250.90.73/view/index.shtml

 

 

Awesome! Thanks!

I'm lost. Someone please help me.

I thought that all the foundations surrounding the HOLE were recently built and are now supporting roadways.

What exactly are they demolishing?

Housing at Banks now an issue

Agency urges including subsidized apartments

BY GREGORY KORTE | [email protected]

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080416/NEWS01/804160369/

 

Cincinnati's public housing agency is insisting that the Banks development - the proposed $1 billion riverfront neighborhood to include shops, condos, apartments and offices - also include affordable housing. The Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority's board voted Tuesday to urge the city and county to set aside a portion of the new housing units - perhaps 10 percent - for Section 8 units or other subsidized, low-income housing.

 

"This will become the 53rd neighborhood of the city of Cincinnati," said Pete Witte of West Price Hill, the housing commissioner who wrote the resolution. "It makes no sense to me that the city and the county would create what is in essence a brand new residential neighborhood but shut out low-income individuals from living there."

I don't disagree with inclusionary housing policies at all, but I do think that this is way too late in the process to be coming out with a proclamation like this...this is an extremely difficult/touchy issue, and should be handled with great care.

I agree.  I dont necessarily like the idea of telling the world the development will be mixed income.  I thought the point of it was to not be aware of this kind of thing.  Not hiding it, just not being able to tell the difference between subsidized and market rate.  Now EVERYONE will know and the place could have a stigma...I don't know, just theorizing.   

Why is the Banks the target of every social or charitable organization in Cincinnati? The strategy seems to be to create enough waves that scare investors so you get a pay off or special concession.  They see the Banks as a big money grab for their cause.

 

Next we are going to hear from the Greater Cincinnati Golden Retriever Rescue Association; that 5% of the Banks should be set aside for a publicly funded animal shelter.

If they want what's best for Cincinnati, they will not stall the project any more than it has been already.  It's too late in the game to be proposing something like this.

"The Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority's board voted Tuesday to urge the city and county to set aside a portion of the new housing units - perhaps 10 percent - for Section 8 units or other subsidized, low-income housing."

 

Section 8?! Are they joking? I think that's crazy ... I'm all for filling this area with middle-class folks, but section 8 ... come on ...

This doesn't have to stall anything.  I think the idea of income integration is a worthy one to prop up.  I just don't like the fact that it was on the front page of the enquirer and was opened to opinion on enquirer.com.  Those ignorant to these kinds of things have no room to give opinions, IMO :)  (oh no, the Housing 630 class rears its ugly head...Randy, I know you feel me on this one)

Wow. I used to joke that the DIC will demand satellite space there. This is the next worst thing.

 

There's plenty of low income housing in the area.

 

I said this before too, social service agencies have this city by the balls. Enough.

The Banks is a great opportunity for Cincinnati to make a stand on some very important social issues.  That is why it has been the target of discussion over prevailing wages, minority contracts, and affordable housing.

 

Great cities do these things, and ultimately make their communities better for all walks of life.  Do you think it is by any coincidence that Atlanta is the "black capital" for America and arguably offers one of the best markets in the country for middle-class black individuals?  They did things like prevailing wages and minority contracts long ago and over time it has paid off big time for them.

 

These are VERY important and complex issues, that should certainly be addressed...I just think that coming in after the ceremonial ground breaking and then making your case known is a bit late, and to be honest somewhat diminishing to your cause.  This should have been a talking point from the very start.

This doesn't have to stall anything.  I think the idea of income integration is a worthy one to prop up.  I just don't like the fact that it was on the front page of the enquirer and was opened to opinion on enquirer.com.  Those ignorant to these kinds of things have no room to give opinions, IMO :)  (oh no, the Housing 630 class rears its ugly head...Randy, I know you feel me on this one)

 

I have no issue at all at income integration (say, 5-10%), but I do have an issue on when it was raised.

Next we are going to hear from the Greater Cincinnati Golden Retriever Rescue Association; that 5% of the Banks should be set aside for a publicly funded animal shelter.

 

Shhhh!!!  That announcement isn't supposed to be made until the first week of May.  Your loose lips are killing the GCGRRA!

Baha.  I don't think this announcement will stall the project one bit.  Yeah, they "want it" but we all "want" things.  If they WORK to make it happen, well then maybe it will, but at this point in the game they are facing an uphill battle and they know it.  Honestly, look at who is behind this, Pete Witte (thats almost 'nuff said) but its CLEARLY a political ploy.  I don't see any major developer being scared away by what is in essence a non-binding referendum.  Brinksmanship.  Pure and simple.

CMHA got on the front page!  That is all they were after.    10% is UNREALISTIC and they know it, but they got free press out of the deal.

Only in Cincinnati.

Only in Cincinnati.

 

Nah, political pandering and brinksmanship is universal.

I honestly think they brought this up at the last minute, because the city was shuffling it's feet allowing the kkk to march on fountain square. Thats

just part of it. There is still a hidden boycott going on. They never said they ended it.

I'm lost. Someone please help me.

I thought that all the foundations surrounding the HOLE were recently built and are now supporting roadways.

What exactly are they demolishing?

 

My guess is they are old foundations for the parking garages, ramps and the actual Cinergy Field that were never removed:

 

http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=39.09691,-84.50998&z=17&t=O&marker0=40.35149%2C-74.90933%2Cgoat%20hill

 

switch between "satellite" - a Current air photo

and "DOQ" , several years' old photo, to see how the old stadium overlaps the current 'hole'

 

Tracy Jones is grilling this guy about this on 700 WLW right now.

Doesn't keep me from wanting to break every radio I own so it can't tune in 700 WLW ;)

Public housing at The Banks: 'ill-timed'

BY GREGORY KORTE | [email protected]

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080416/NEWS01/304160049/

 

 

Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory angrily swatted down demands for public housing at The Banks Wednesday, saying it was ill-timed and counterproductive to affordable housing efforts in the region.

 

“How dare they? How dare CMHA,” Mallory said testily, the day after the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority voted to insist that the $1 billion riverfront development set aside a portion of the project for subsidized housing.

Way to go Mayor Mallory. 

 

Seriously though, how many units do you think CMHA will buy at market rates, given the likely cost of properties down there?  10%? I mean really, how may of the empty condos currently in the CBD selling for $400K+ in the CBD have they bought?  I really see voucher recipients living in the McAlpin. HA!@  How many buildings?  Are they buying 33 W4th and renovating it for millions? 

 

Its a card.  Being played.  And if the bluff is called, and they want to try to keep playing, it will certainly cost Mr. Witte just about all of his political, and his organizations financial, capital -- in one fell swoop.

 

Its just absurd, this is a market based system.  If you get a voucher for X dollars, and rent is Y dollars, you will move to the place with the lowest difference between X and Y.  Period.  There is no way to make sure that load is distributed differently unless you step up and buy properties at market rate.  The budget of CMHA organizations would be DECIMATED if they did that in high cost neighborhoods.  Does anyone think its a coincidence that there are few residents living in Hyde Park on CMHA vouchers?  Not only is it well out of the means due to the market, how many residents would be moved through these places because complaining neighbors know how to use the system, and I am not even saying vindictively (although that is certainly possible), just that bad neighbors cause problems, problems bring police, and police calls cause people to lose vouchers.

 

Its such a ridiculous ploy.  I would only hope the Mr. Witte would be working to serve CMHA voucher recipients, being smart and working WITHIN the market system to find as many people homes in as many neighborhoods as the market allows.  Anything else is futile (unless you want to say capitalism is dead).

Mr. Witte is not happy that his neighborhood has a disproportionate number of houses with 'the lowest difference between X and Y'

Fix the neighborhood then

 

Don't use your position with a county wide social services system as mouthpiece for your personal neighborhood agenda *cough*

He is using The Banks as a platform for a more regional issue.  At the heart of the issue I would imagine that he is arguing for some sort of inclusionary zoning practices when it comes to housing.

 

His timing/motivation are debatable, but this is certainly a valid issue.  It is unfair that neighborhoods like Westwood, Price Hill, and other shoulder the affordable housing load for a 2+ million person region.  Just like it is unfair that neighborhoods like Over-the-Rhine and the Westend shoulder the social service load for a 2+ million person region.

Zoning is one thing, this is another.  Regardless of what the zoning is, the market will continue to dictate price.  I can zone Hyde Park for giant section 8 housing projects all I want, they won't get built there because there isn't the millions of dollars that would be required to buy the property to do it.  Granted, this is somewhat different because it is a new build, but the time to leverage that as part of the process was VERY early on in the planning.  (I do believe it is possible to integrate upscale housing with publicly subsidized housing in a construction project such as this, but it needs to be part of the consideration from the outset - at the very earliest design phases)

 

Is it fair?  Who knows, it is the market.  Work the market, or the market works you ;)

 

Edit - by all this, I just mean to say that I believe in voucher housing programs to a degree, but only to the degree that they work within the market.  The subsidy required to do otherwise (buy expensive property for use as subsidized houseing) is just too high.  If Mr. Witte's agenda is that he doesn't like that his neighborhood has been disproportionately affected, then the best solution is for him to keep working for changes on the ground there.

This is just a ploy.  In my opinion though this project shouldn't have affordable housing.  It doesn't make sense.  The toniest new neighborhood in the city should not have public housing this is just from a "does it pass the sniff test" point of view.

Pete Witte seems to be bitter about what is happening to his neighborhood (and he should be). I completely disagree with using the Banks to stage discussion on what should be a regional issue. I wholeheartedly agree with what Mayor Mallory said: It should be a county issue, not just a throw section 8 people in Cincinnati. I'd like Mr. Witte to have the audacity to say the same stuff when some housing development occurs in Indian Hill, Hyde Park, or Madeira.

 

I feel sorry for what is happening to the West Side in Cincinnati, but Witte needs to pick a better time to delve into this county wide issue.

Witte wanted attention and he got it.  But its negative attention.  His lack of common sense astounds me.  Hats off to Mallory for stating his anger and not being stupid.  For cryin' outloud our downtown has plenty of surface parking lots to convert to affordable housing.  The usable space on Broadway Commons alone is borderline ridiculous.  The Banks is about a new beginning with a foundation for positive and high property value.  We don't need a section that will turn into a garbage dump with people throwing their crap all over the street because they can't seem to see trash cans.  No offense to the section 8 people that are responsible and hardworking...but for the most part, we know where it goes and The Banks sure as hell doesn't need it. 

He is using The Banks as a platform for a more regional issue.  At the heart of the issue I would imagine that he is arguing for some sort of inclusionary zoning practices when it comes to housing.

 

His timing/motivation are debatable, but this is certainly a valid issue.  It is unfair that neighborhoods like Westwood, Price Hill, and other shoulder the affordable housing load for a 2+ million person region.  Just like it is unfair that neighborhoods like Over-the-Rhine and the Westend shoulder the social service load for a 2+ million person region.

 

Let me first say that I have a newfound respect for Pete Witte and the Price Hill Civic Club, Westwood Concern, etc.  They found a way to effect the bureaucracy that they thought (not necessarily incorrectly) was screwing them, and they exploited it.  Brilliant really.  Probably the most impressive political move by a local Republican since Bedinghaus used the county sales tax to build the stadiums.

 

I don't think this is going to effect the Banks from evolving as we all assume it will.  The most likely way this project will get screwed up is if the developer changes it after getting the financing.

 

Before we jump down Witte's throat, or begin some moralistic, pull it up by your own bootstraps preaching about how to fix up Price Hill, let's remember what he said-

 

“The Banks needs to take its fair share, just like Mount Lookout, just like Hyde Park, and just like my friends in Symmes Township – wherever that is.”

 

This guy is fighting for his City, via his neighborhood.  I think we all can respect that.  The County needs to pull it's own weight via low-income housing.  Mallory will be able to deal with Witte on this.