^All of it.

If airforce_jm is thinking of the tower only, it will only footprint about 1/3 of the lot.

 

See:

 

 

and

 

It still gives me a chuckle to see surface parking on the site plan for a skyscraper. Of course I understand the situation, but nevertheless.

The parking lot was already there.... it isn't being created with this construction. The lot belongs (I believe) to the Queen City Club.

Yep, there's nothing they can do about that. 

Well, they could build something on it.  Although with a mere 10,000 parking spaces within a 2-block radius I know it would be tough finding a place for those 75 cars.  And actually for quite awhile I have thought that an L-shaped building in this space could be really interesting.  There are a lot of L and T-shaped buildings in New York where they've created extra entrances to skyscrapers on various sides of city blocks. 

 

 

Like I said, I know the situation, but it doesn't make it any less humorous/unfortunate. If anything, they could keep the lot facing Broad and reconfigure it for drop-offs/valet and develop the frontage on Fourth.

 

Cincinnati is fortunate enough to not suffer from the frequent juxtaposition of skyscrapers and parking lots that you see in other cities, so I can't complain too much. Plus, the arcade/parking garage works to hide the lot presently visible from Fourth and Sycamore, so some improvement will be made.

^The point of the story is that it is not the same lot.  That lot is owned/controlled by a different entity than who owns/controls the Queen City Square properties.  If anything were to happen on that surface lot it would have to be done by the Queen City Club.  It's unfortunate that the lot is there, and it's unfortunate that there are any kinds of substantial surface lots in center cities...BUT it is irrelevant to this project.

Perhaps it is irrelevent to the project, but not to its discussion.

 

But whatever, I'm tired; if you want to be easily defeated and not even consider possibilities because ownership is different, fine.

 

 

^All of it.

If airforce_jm is thinking of the tower only, it will only footprint about 1/3 of the lot.

 

Yeah i was talking about the tower only. Sorry, i should've been more specific but thanks for postin the pic. Any word on what the retail space is going to be?

Perhaps it is irrelevent to the project, but not to its discussion.

 

But whatever, I'm tired; if you want to be easily defeated and not even consider possibilities because ownership is different, fine.

 

 

 

Let's fill up the surface lots at Central Parkway, 5th and Race, the lots near the convention center, and Broadway Commons before we start talking about squeezing buildings between buildings.

ESPECIALLY BC. 

Perhaps it is irrelevent to the project, but not to its discussion.

 

But whatever, I'm tired; if you want to be easily defeated and not even consider possibilities because ownership is different, fine.

 

 

 

Let's fill up the surface lots at Central Parkway, 5th and Race, the lots near the convention center, and Broadway Commons before we start talking about squeezing buildings between buildings.

 

I certainly agree with that.

Perhaps it is irrelevent to the project, but not to its discussion.

 

But whatever, I'm tired; if you want to be easily defeated and not even consider possibilities because ownership is different, fine.

 

 

 

Let's fill up the surface lots at Central Parkway, 5th and Race, the lots near the convention center, and Broadway Commons before we start talking about squeezing buildings between buildings.

 

Amen!

Think of how different our skyline would look if all that was filled.  Not only that, what about ALLLLLL that flat land by union terminal.  Well, obviously business are there but you get my point.

Does anyone know the progress in removing the debris?

Does anyone know the progress in removing the debris?

 

It was nearly gone when I saw it over Labor day weekend.

I drove by yesterday evening.  The garage is completely gone and they got several trucks hauling debris now.

They're also doing the pilings(?) (or whatever those giant steel beams that get dropped into those deep drilled holes are called) at the same time.  They've been doing quite a few of those each day for at least the last couple weeks. 

Drove past the site today and it is nice and clear.  It is a massive change when viewed heading south on Sycamore...can't wait for the finished product.

Does anyone know if the financial crisis will have any implact on the QCSII development schedule? (or the Banks project?)

Doubted! 

 

They have a tenant already committed. (Great American).    If they didn't have anyone named by now I would think differently.  This project should be safe till the end.

Does anyone know if the financial crisis will have any implact on the QCSII development schedule? (or the Banks project?)

 

Yeah, my understanding is the money is already in place for QCSII, so I don't think it will impact it.

I think the Banks will have a strong enough tenant draw that it will get filled regardless of all this economic stuff.  Truth is 90% of all this economic trouble is in the head.  It doesn't have to be real if people dont want it to be.  The number one element that controls the stock market is FEAR.  That's it.

Considering both projects are already under-construction I wouldn't foresee them being affected.

Unfortunately, I think there is a lesson here. When Cincy finally gets its act together to build a serious skyscraper, head for the hills because economic disaster is upon us. If only we were about spend a fair bit of money on a rail terminal on the west side of town it could 1929 all over again, or maybe the new Brent Spence will be like the Union Terminal.

Yes, it seems af if Cincinnati (at least until recently) was always behind the curve. The Banks should have begun years ago.

1929, when they built the Carew Tower, another Cincinnati failure I suppose?

I dont think dmerkow is saying those projects were failures.  Simply that they were completed/started at the doorstep of economic depression...great depression, in fact.

^ That's funny, I thought about how ironic that was this week too!!    Cincy's new tallest since 29, and their are some eerily similar issues going on in the world today.

The buildings were all great successes. They also (esp. Union Terminal) helped sustain the construction industry in the area at least up through 33 or so. As Phatty mentioned, I was commenting on the irony mostly. Let's keep our fingers crossed that this is just a big practical joke.

 

 

Well hopefully we don't take too much from the Great Depression, remember that little project called the Subway.

I was just thinking that.  I have a scenario playing out in my head that would be the ultimate irony, but I'm not going to write it out because there is nowhere near enough wood in my house to knock on.

You know, this like other things will not last. Everything is in place so when QSCII is finished and the economy comes roaring back, they'll be sitting there all pretty looking like geniuses.

1929, when they built the Carew Tower, another Cincinnati failure I suppose?

 

No, but if I remember correctly, the Carew Tower was supposed to be even more impressive than it already is, but was scaled back a little after construction began, due to the depression.  Can anyone confirm or correct that for me?

^

I have heard the same thing

I remember hearing it was supposed to be clad in marble (granite?). Instead they used bricks to keep costs down.

I just get tired of people finding new ways to look at Cincinnati in a negative light.

We don't exist in a vacuum here, Trump has a half dozen projects on the east coast in trouble right now.

If he didn't see it coming I don't think anyone here should be held to a higher standard.

 

And you're right, they did cut costs on Carew, but they did get it built in 13 months because they had all the manpower they needed, and it cost them a whole 13 million. And that included the ice rink in the ballroom.

When they remodeled in the 80's and found it under a false floor, they turned it on and it still worked!

(I don't know what that has to do with anything, just something that stood out from a recent tour I had there of the hotel.)

People find Cincinnati in a negative lot for many reasons( trust me, I hate listening to it too) For instance, you have old fashioned ultra-conservative residents who get scared of skyscrapers, growing hustle & bustle of urban living, and a ton of foot traffic.  They don't like the fact their property might house a future transit line that could benefit Cincy beyond belief.  They don't like the fact our sky scrapers are getting taller instead of shorter.  Where one much needed place is growing because of money there's always another place pointed out by a negative resident where that money could go.  It's like people complain about poor schooling systems yet they bitch about paying taxes THAT WOULD HELP THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.  There's a lot of ego problems in Cincy but I'm glad we're getting a new sky scraper.  QCS is already bringing much needed energy to our momentum.  I say keep it up and don't listen to all of the negative people who can't find anything else to do except bash their own city.

Who on this thread is looking at Cincinnati in a negative light? The Carew Tower is amazing, nobody is arguing that, but I do think it's useful to talk about how it was scaled back.

 

As has been mentioned before, there are striking similarities in both the projects and external environment between QCS and Carew.  The economy is definitely not anywhere close to what it was in 1930, but I would be surprised if the contractor/architects aren't at least beginning to look for ways to cut costs.  What if Great American goes the way of AIG? Do you still build it?  What if Western Southern tanks? WHO would continue to build it? These are questions that need to be asked and back up plans need to be made just in case.

Carew is crazy ugly, don't kid yourself.  And that stupid little fountain thing next door with that chick holding water (or whatever) is the lamest thing.  I don't get why you all like that old, clunky bridge either.  What, like it's special? 

 

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Whew, that was difficult to say.  I don't know how those commenters on Cincinnati.com do it. 

On a serious note though, as long as we're talking about similar economic situations...is there any talk on scaling back plans on QCS, OR adding more jobs to the project to help the economy and get it built faster? 

 

Great American could lobby for contractors to hire more outside workforce and possibly boost their image.  I think it's worth a shot at least.

I do agree with you AJknee about Carew.  I understand builders had to make do with brick.  The time it took to build it was also impressive.  But yes people kid themselves.  That building is ugly.  Some elements are kind of cool but the color doesn't help and I've never been a fan of skyscrapers that look spaghetti thin from one angle and huge from the face.  Bring on QCS.

^I'm pretty sure ajknee was being sarcastic with those comments about Carew, Hemroid. 

Woah there, Hem.  All that jibberish above the dashed line was sarcasm.  I love Carew (despite it  having that bulky lopsided top) 

ah oops.

HAHA, no worries.  You're still entitle to dislike it though.  And your reasons were valid.  So, Hem, I agree with you on your last comment....

 

Bring on QCS

 

When Cincy finally gets its act together to build a serious skyscraper' date=' head for the hills because economic disaster is upon us. [/quote']

 

Ok, I had to reread about ten times before it jumped out at me.

He's saying they finally got off their asses and now the economy tanks.

 

So, I apologize for the knee-jerk reaction.

I still think if the obvious challenges can be overcome, downturns are the best times for building, everything is in place when things turn around.

^--- I'm going to go ahead and disagree with that last statement. A credit crises of this magnitude coupled with the alarming rate at which investment banks, insurance companies, and a couple regular banks are going under is absolutely the WORST time to try a project of this size.

 

That doesn't mean I don't think it will get done.  Everything was drawn up and all of the dotted lines were signed well before this mess, but that doesn't mean things will continue as planned. Especially if any of the major companies involved (God forbid) goes under....

 

We all have FDR to thank for the amazing projects of the 30's in Cincinnati (Carew, Union Terminal, Waldvogel (sp?) viaduct). He set the tone nationally and had the federal government sponsor a number of projects to keep people working. I definitely know the current administration won't be sponsoring anything of the sort, and it's hard to imagine even an Obama administration having enough power/clout/money to do much either.

Wasn't Carew Tower built by the Carew family with their money, planned and designed well before the stock market crash?  And wasn't Union Terminal built with City of Cincinnati bond money?  Not trying to be an a-hole, just asking.

You're probably right. I was speaking more to the general direction set by FDR and the New Deal public works etc...

WPA projects in Cincinnati consisted of stuff like retaining walls -- Union Terminal, The Carew Tower, and the Western Hills Viaduct were all private projects.  Both Union Terminal and the Western Hills Viaduct were built by the Union Terminal Company, which was controlled by the seven railroads that built the station.  I believe the city gave away land (Lincoln Park) for the terminal and might have backed bonds (not unlike UC backing the McMicken/Calhoun project, which obviously hasn't happened), but it was almost entirely privately funded.  The Carew Tower broke ground a month before the the stock market crash and was privately funded as well.  There were plans for two more towers of similar size on nearby blocks that were scuttled, so Cincinnati was just a month or two away from having a much more substantial prewar skyline.