47 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Isn't the outside just a skin? The structure is fine for residential. They'll just strip the façade and it'll look completely different.

So you're telling me that it doesn't have to look like a rear-projection tv forever???

1 hour ago, DEPACincy said:

It's a large base. They could probably put two slender towers on opposite sides. One facing Vine and one facing Race.

The footprint of the tower is already determined.  You can see the supports and elevator core here:

3 hours ago, taestell said:

Generally speaking, I think we are going to see many buildings that "don't make the most sense for a residential conversion" converted to residential anyway, because of the combination of companies that are downsizing offices due to increased WFH and the continually increasing demand for downtown living. And while many companies are sticking with downtown offices, they are opting for more unique solutions like office space in historic buildings — I think 1980s-style corporate office towers are going to be in decline for all but the biggest of corporations that want to make a mark on the skyline.

 

Not as much of a risk of 8 floors right in the middle of a 40-story building suddenly being vacated due to a move, acquisition or bankruptcy then sitting empty for 10 years.

What I'm wondering is was the downtown residents council simply confused in stating the location of the new residences? With the former Macy's building being announced as new apartments, we're they simply thinking wrong? Or does it seem like from details it's different?

On 10/29/2021 at 2:32 PM, DEPACincy said:

Isn't the outside just a skin? The structure is fine for residential. They'll just strip the façade and it'll look completely different.

It's not the facade that makes me say it doesn't make sense for residential it's the weird trapezoidal shape that's 200' wide with deep floor plates meaning not much of the apartment will be able to get natural light. I've never been in this building so I'm not sure how the core works but it just seems like a really strange building to be repurposed for residential. I know life isn't an either/or proposition but current empty buildings like Garfield Suites, Terrace Plaza, Carew Tower, etc are all much more ready for residential conversion. Even other 80's era office buildings with smaller floorplates like Chiquita or 600 Vine would work better as residential.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/2644775002
 

old article back from 2019…but fifth third, who owns the air rights, goes on record saying that they want to see an apartment (or office) tower on top of the foundry base. 
 

So I guess it’s not particularly shocking that a developer was found who wants to purse a residential tower now. 
 

 

7 minutes ago, Troeros2 said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/2644775002
 

old article back from 2019…but fifth third, who owns the air rights, goes on record saying that they want to see an apartment (or office) tower on top of the foundry base. 
 

So I guess it’s not particularly shocking that a developer was found who wants to purse a residential tower now. 
 

 

5/3 doesn’t own the air rights anymore. 3CDC does apparently.

On 10/29/2021 at 6:57 PM, stashua123 said:

What I'm wondering is was the downtown residents council simply confused in stating the location of the new residences? With the former Macy's building being announced as new apartments, we're they simply thinking wrong? Or does it seem like from details it's different?

I think you might be spot on about this!

13 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I think you might be spot on about this!

original quote:

 

John and Rob gave the Board a heads-up about the former Macy’s site at 5th and Vine, and said that they would set up a virtual session with the New York-based developer as part of the November Board meeting. The plan is for apartments on floors 9-12, with parkingbelow.

 

5th and vine is not where the Macy hq building is…I don’t believe the Macy hq is only going to have apartments on the 9-12 floors is it? 
 

and the article about the Macy conversion said parking would be adjacent…not below…

 

so yeah, details don’t exactly match..

27 minutes ago, Troeros2 said:

original quote:

 

 

 

5th and vine is not where the Macy hq building is…I don’t believe the Macy hq is only going to have apartments on the 9-12 floors is it? 
 

and the article about the Macy conversion said parking would be adjacent…not below…

 

so yeah, details don’t exactly match..

That doesn’t change the fact much about the residential tower on Fountain Place doesn’t make sense. Such as why would 3CDC bring in a developer to build it and not just do it themselves? they are more than capable. Why would 3CDC/DMG go public about a future office tower expansion if there is a residential tower in the works? Why would the “virtual session” being set up not be lead by 3CDC? They OWN Fountain Place so it makes no sense lol.

 

To top it all off your post mentions the developer for this Fountain Place residential tower is New York based, Well guess where the Macys HQ residential conversion developer is based? NEW YORK. Also guess when they will be presenting their plans?: “The planning commission will review the proposal at its next meeting Nov. 5.” Which is the same timeframe as when the Fountain Place tower was to be presented.

 

Coincidence? I don’t think so.

1 minute ago, 646empire said:

That doesn’t change the fact much about the residential tower on Fountain Place doesn’t make sense. Such as why would 3CDC bring in a developer to build it and not just do it themselves? they are more than capable. Why would 3CDC/DMG go public about a future office tower expansion if there is a residential tower in the works? Why would the “virtual session” being set up not be lead by 3CDC? They OWN Fountain Place so it makes no sense lol.

 

To top it all off your post mentions the developer for this Fountain Place residential tower is New York based, Well guess where the Macys HQ residential conversion developer is based? NEW YORK. Also guess when they will be presenting their plans?: “The planning commission will review the proposal at its next meeting Nov. 5.” Which is the same timeframe as when the Fountain Place tower was to be presented.

 

Coincidence? I don’t think so.

Or maybe they are working on 2 projects? Not exactly odd.

 

That said, I don’t really have a clue and I’m just a bystander in all of this. Obviously I’m basing a lot of this on what was shared through the news letter.
 

The details don’t match between the 2 projects. That’s obvious. It’s not odd for one developer to work on multiple projects…that said it could be a mix up…who knows…

 

It would be nice if someone could reach out to the downtown residential committee (from where that news letter originated from) and ask more info about when that video conference will be from the nyc developer and see if they can obtain more details that way.

http://www.ilivedowntown.com/upcoming-events/
 

it looks like there is a meeting today actually. Would be curious if this is brought up at all. 
 

Edit: sorry not today but Nov 9th

Edited November 2, 20213 yr by Troeros2

One more thing, the Macys HQ does have a built in parking garage below the office floors but not enough for 338 units of apartments which is why they may have mentioned adding more adjacent to the property. Let’s just wait and see these details but I think these are the same project.

34 minutes ago, 646empire said:

One more thing, the Macys HQ does have a built in parking garage below the office floors but not enough for 338 units of apartments which is why they may have mentioned adding more adjacent to the property. Let’s just wait and see these details but I think these are the same project.

Interesting.

 

Just a slight tidbit…but the guest speaker who discussed the potential development for the Macy fountain square building was Rob Denham. 
 

He is the Senior Development Officer for Cincinnati Department of Community and Economic Development. 
 

I guess mistakes happen, but it would be odd to have so many details lost in translation like that (address, floors, parking, etc).

I'm not sure where the confusion originated but it seems like someone just got confused, which is understandable given that both the former Macy's HQ and the former Macy's store are being redeveloped. It seems pretty likely that the former HQ is going residential and if a new tower is build above The Foundry, it would be office.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2021/11/09/horse-drawn-carriages-rides-may-banned-cincinnati/6359224001/

 

Not surprising.  When I saw the location of the new Jeff Ruby's at The Foundry, my first thought was that his entrance and dining patio will be right in front of the horse carriage parking and there is no way he'd want customers smelling that.  I'm sure 3CDC has been working on this behind the scenes for months.  Personally, I'm glad to see them go.  

^ I think they could go to another part of the square. I personally think they are a good thing. It is an additional attraction to bring people downtown and to create that downtown experience. It is a small business, it brings in some payroll dollars to the city. It adds to the city experience.  I could possibly see why Ruby would not want it next to his patio, but at the same time the carriages would also add to his experience. There are a number of clientele who would go to a romantic dinner there or visitors from out of town who may check out Ruby's and then go for a horse and buggy ride afterward. To me it is shortsighted to get rid of them as they are an attraction for people in the city that cant be experienced elsewhere in the suburbs.

I doubt Ruby had anything to do with it. Seelbach had been working on it for awhile. Other cities across the country have been moving this direction, as the animals are often kept in inhumane conditions and they suffer psychologically from mixing with car traffic in a busy city.

The proposal was just voted down by City Council. Young, Mann, Smitherman, Goodin, and Keating voted "No," and it failed 5-4.

Edited November 10, 20213 yr by jwulsin

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

^ I think they could go to another part of the square. I personally think they are a good thing. It is an additional attraction to bring people downtown and to create that downtown experience. It is a small business, it brings in some payroll dollars to the city. It adds to the city experience.  I could possibly see why Ruby would not want it next to his patio, but at the same time the carriages would also add to his experience. There are a number of clientele who would go to a romantic dinner there or visitors from out of town who may check out Ruby's and then go for a horse and buggy ride afterward. To me it is shortsighted to get rid of them as they are an attraction for people in the city that cant be experienced elsewhere in the suburbs.

 

Stand next to their holding area for 15 minutes and see what you think.  The elephant house at the zoo smells better.

The horse drawn carriages are trashy and stink up downtown, not to mention the potentially cruelty to the horses.  Most major cities have already banned them and we should too. 

Maybe this is all a ploy to redevelop West End Stables.

10 hours ago, jwulsin said:

The proposal was just voted down by City Council. Young, Mann, Smitherman, Goodin, and Keating voted "No," and it failed 5-4.

 

I think It would pass thru the new council if brought up again.

Edited November 11, 20213 yr by 646empire

2 hours ago, 646empire said:

 

I think I would pass thru the new council if brought up again.

I don’t think most council members outside of Seelbach really care strongly about the issue

3 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I don’t think most council members outside of Seelbach really care strongly about the issue

In regards to The Foundry/the new Jeff Rubys restaurant it’s my understanding that the horses will not be stationed there anymore anyway. 

6 hours ago, 646empire said:

In regards to The Foundry/the new Jeff Rubys restaurant it’s my understanding that the horses will not be stationed there anymore anyway. 

Where would they be? Would they move in front of the Westin? It seems like that would bottle up traffic on 5th. Walnut is too narrow and it has the bus traffic. Fountain sq seems like the only real viable place for them to operate. 

57 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Where would they be? Would they move in front of the Westin? It seems like that would bottle up traffic on 5th. Walnut is too narrow and it has the bus traffic. Fountain sq seems like the only real viable place for them to operate. 

That I’m not exactly sure. As part of the Foundry Project 3CDC is expanding the sidewalks along Vine, 5th and Race streets. Vine St. along the Royce and Rubys restaurants the space the horses had previously isn’t there anymore. 

Edited November 11, 20213 yr by 646empire

Well city council voted to keep the horses 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Where would they be? Would they move in front of the Westin? It seems like that would bottle up traffic on 5th. Walnut is too narrow and it has the bus traffic. Fountain sq seems like the only real viable place for them to operate. 

Move them to OTR. More nightlife in the area, closer to the stables. I think the neighborhood lends itself better for something more slow pace like a horse ride than downtown CBD. 

I personally think we should ban them. They might make sense if we had a giant park like Central Park or something where you can have a pleasant ride through nature (I think NYC banned them years ago), but they aren't some big draw to downtown. There might be a few people who regularly ride them, but most people probably wouldn't realize they were there in the first place if we banned them.

EDIT: Apparently NYC hasn't banned them, but there's a campaign to ban them. I think they're currently limited to Central Park.

43 minutes ago, savadams13 said:

Move them to OTR. More nightlife in the area, closer to the stables. I think the neighborhood lends itself better for something more slow pace like a horse ride than downtown CBD. 

OTR would provide nicer architecture and that draw for people to see. ALthough I am not sure if the bar crowd down there is the horse and buggy crowd. Although stationing them by Washignton Park and music Hall may not be a bad idea. It would fit well with that neighborhood. 

 

My wife and I took a ride around 10-12 years ago one time and it is a quick circle through Piatt Park and City Hall. They certainly capture the crowd and family crowd on the square but to your point, I do think it could work in the Washington Park area and the route can be pretty similar just go South instead of North.

 

43 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

I personally think we should ban them. They might make sense if we had a giant park like Central Park or something where you can have a pleasant ride through nature (I think NYC banned them years ago), but they aren't some big draw to downtown. There might be a few people who regularly ride them, but most people probably wouldn't realize they were there in the first place if we banned them.

There are enough people who ride them that it is economical for the stable company to offer these rides. Clearly it is a viable business model in the city or else it would not be here and I highly doubt the city subsidizes the stables.  They are enough of a draw that for those who want to enjoy them should be able to do so. 

To your point, no they would not be missed like they would be in Charleston SC but for those who want a ride during the holidays with their family or on a cool fall or spring evening, it is an amenity worth having. 

For me, it's less of where these horse and buggies are traipsing... but more about the squalid conditions where the horses live.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1143622,-84.5273679,112a,35y,38.14h,42.47t/data=!3m1!1e3

Why doesn’t the city do something then? They are probably not oblivious to the operation. Clearly they can shut them down for multiple reasons. 

 

I don’t have issues with the horses. I think they add charm to the city landscape. I don’t know what kind of trauma it adds to the horses…obviously I feel bad if this traumatizes the horses. At the same time, let’s bot pretend the owner will just shut down operations and send these horses to some majestic blue grass farm.

 

At the end of the day, the city needs to create better operating standards for urban farms with live stock and Chris seelbach should have pursued that avenue instead of outright trying to ban horses in the city. 

An outright ban is probably the only thing that the city has the power to do. I would think that any effort to "create better operating standards for urban farms" would need to come from the Ohio Department of Agriculture, I don't think cities really have the power to regulate farms. They could rezone the land where the horse "farm" is located but the current owner would be grandfathered in, so it wouldn't affect anything.

1 hour ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

For me, it's less of where these horse and buggies are traipsing... but more about the squalid conditions where the horses live.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1143622,-84.5273679,112a,35y,38.14h,42.47t/data=!3m1!1e3

Who's to say these are squalid conditions? Certainly, you or I would not live there, but we are talking horses who are very comfortable living in barns. They have lived in them for centuries. I would hardly call that cruel and unusual conditions for an animal. Plus, there is the health department and these facilities are likely inspected to ensure that they are being kept to a certain standard.

 

1 hour ago, Troeros2 said:

I don’t know what kind of trauma it adds to the horses…obviously I feel bad if this traumatizes the horses. At the same time, let’s bot pretend the owner will just shut down operations and send these horses to some majestic blue grass farm.

Does it really traumatize the horses? They have been used to pull carriages and have people ride them for centuries. It is not as if people are treating the horses as some side show that is different than what they originally were intended to be. To your point as well, it is not like they were be turned over to roam free in the wild. Chances are, if the city shut down operations, they would be relocated to another city to do the same job. 

 

1 hour ago, Troeros2 said:

At the end of the day, the city needs to create better operating standards for urban farms with live stock and Chris seelbach should have pursued that avenue instead of outright trying to ban horses in the city

The city controls the zoning code, the county has a health department, there are other agencies under the city's purview that could be dialed up to make it difficult to do business in the area if they wanted. Seelbach was of course trying to be his virtue signaling self and try and fix a problem that only really existed in his head. 

4 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Seelbach was of course trying to be his virtue signaling self and try and fix a problem that only really existed in his head. 

 

Not everyone you disagree with is "virtue signaling", let's tone down the political rhetoric in this non-political thread.

11 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Who's to say these are squalid conditions? Certainly, you or I would not live there, but we are talking horses who are very comfortable living in barns. They have lived in them for centuries. I would hardly call that cruel and unusual conditions for an animal. Plus, there is the health department and these facilities are likely inspected to ensure that they are being kept to a certain standard.

 

Does it really traumatize the horses? They have been used to pull carriages and have people ride them for centuries. It is not as if people are treating the horses as some side show that is different than what they originally were intended to be. To your point as well, it is not like they were be turned over to roam free in the wild. Chances are, if the city shut down operations, they would be relocated to another city to do the same job. 

 

The city controls the zoning code, the county has a health department, there are other agencies under the city's purview that could be dialed up to make it difficult to do business in the area if they wanted. Seelbach was of course trying to be his virtue signaling self and try and fix a problem that only really existed in his head. 

It absolutely traumatizes the horses. That's not a question anymore. People have studied the effects this type of work has on them and have objectively come to the conclusion it's not good for their mental or physical health. Saying they've been used for centuries for something is not a real argument. It was inhumane then too, we just didn't have a care for their well-being like we do now.

 

The problem hardly exists "only in (Seelbach's) head." It's an issue in nearly every city where horses are used for this type of thing. As mentioned, the scope in which they can be used in NYC has been greatly reduced to be just in the park and they've already been banned in plenty of our peer cities and other countries for precisely these reasons.

 

Beyond that though....they suck. They aren't fun, they aren't romantic. You just sit there, it smells like sh*t, you move slowly while traffic is angry all around you, and you have the company of whoever is steering the horse sitting directly in front of you. You pay a fee for what's really a pretty crappy (literally) experience.

8 minutes ago, jmicha said:

Beyond that though....they suck. They aren't fun, they aren't romantic. You just sit there, it smells like sh*t, you move slowly while traffic is angry all around you, and you have the company of whoever is steering the horse sitting directly in front of you. You pay a fee for what's really a pretty crappy (literally) experience.

isn't that up to the individual rider to decide if it is a worthwhile experience. It is not Chris's decision to make for them. 

 

9 minutes ago, jmicha said:

It absolutely traumatizes the horses. That's not a question anymore. People have studied the effects this type of work has on them and have objectively come to the conclusion it's not good for their mental or physical health.

That is a bit hyperbolic. A traumatized horse is probalby not going to be good for pulling people around in a carriage to begin with. Let's not pretend that these horses would be roaming free and happy in the wild if they were not pulling carriages. They would probably be doing the same thing or be ridden by some other rider around in a circle somewhere. Let's not overhype the traume thing. 

Also, if that were the case, there would be no police horses etc and if it were so inhumane, the Amish would not be using them and there would be no thoroughbred racing either.

 

So I get it, you dont like it, but let's at least let others make their own rational choices on the matter, we do not need the Seelbach crew doing it for them.  

If people didn't find the horse and carriage rides fun and romantic, the company (companies? are they competitors or is it just the one?) would have gone out of business long before Seelbach's war against them. Horses are expensive to keep, so they must be generating decent revenue.

 

And horses, like any other creature, only smell like poo when they poo or when the poo hasn't been cleaned up yet. It's not like they smell like poo all the time. This isn't a Seinfeld episode.

7 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

If people didn't find the horse and carriage rides fun and romantic, the company (companies? are they competitors or is it just the one?) would have gone out of business

 

Puppy mills are disgusting businesses, but the hidden side of puppy mills isn't advertised to people before they buy a puppy. Just because the customer isn't aware something is bad, doesn't mean that the people support every aspect of a business. "The Market" is not always a good indicator of what businesses should exist.

 

People buy clothing made by child labor overseas, but that doesn't mean we should allow child labor in the US.

 

People ride carriages without knowing the detrimental effects on the horses doing the work. This isn't a market decision. People aren't trying to ban them because they are unprofitable.

20 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

People ride carriages without knowing the detrimental effects on the horses doing the work. This isn't a market decision. People aren't trying to ban them because they are unprofitable.

The Free Willie syndrome that has developed distorts reality. Yes, there is an activist class out there that somehow feels these animals are mistreated solely because they give rides to people. No amount of evidence to the contrary will change their opinion and they will continue to beat their drums as long as ever until they get their way. 

 

They are welcome to their opinions and if they want to create change, they can work with the market to do so. You act as if it is such an inhumane thing that only "moral" cough cough people who truly understand the plight of these animals need to stop it by fiat, because the market will never allow that to happen. In your opinion (as well as a few others) you feel these animals are abused and the actions must stop immediately. There really is no other opinion that matters in this case. 

 

I say the market does handle this and does so quite efficiently. There is plenty of room for people who share your opinion to speak and potentially educate and sway people to your line of thinking. After a while, the market will simply go away because no one really wants to ride carriages anymore, or with time, people's interests change and they quit paying for carriage rides. Either way, market influences of some sort cause the industry to die out and you do not need people like Seelbach to make decisions on behalf of others when it really is not his business. 

You're right. The market is perfect and solves all of our problems perfectly. Sorry to argue with you.

25 years ago, I leased garage space to guys who gave carriage rides.  They kept the carriages in the garage and brought the horses in from Kentucky each evening.  They operation was was very bare bones, but the horses seemed well-cared for.  The operators then were old hippie types.  They did not keep the horses in they city like the current company apparently does.  

 

Also, I heard that they City has agreed to make the streetery in front of the new Jeff Ruby's two lanes wide, which seems like it would create a bottleneck there on Vine,  but actually it could be awesome.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The intersection of 5th & Vine needs to be the location of Cincinnati's first pedestrian scramble crossing.

22 minutes ago, taestell said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The intersection of 5th & Vine needs to be the location of Cincinnati's first pedestrian scramble crossing.

Just be careful for the red light runners, cant tell you how many near misses at this intersection, crossing the street

6 hours ago, taestell said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The intersection of 5th & Vine needs to be the location of Cincinnati's first pedestrian scramble crossing.

Too late. 
 

https://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/move-up-cincinnati/city-hopes-new-pedestrian-priority-intersection-will-make-walking-through-westwood-safer?_amp=true

 

17 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I say the market does handle this and does so quite efficiently. There is plenty of room for people who share your opinion to speak and potentially educate and sway people to your line of thinking. After a while, the market will simply go away because no one really wants to ride carriages anymore, or with time, people's interests change and they quit paying for carriage rides. Either way, market influences of some sort cause the industry to die out and you do not need people like Seelbach to make decisions on behalf of others when it really is not his business. 

 

I'm reminded of the age old adage "vote with your wallet." If these horses were truly treated inhumanely, if they smelled like poo, if they were dangerous, etc. people would not support them. If there are hidden problems people are unaware of, awareness can be raised about them and/or the specifics could be legislated (and so far as I can tell, we already have laws about handling livestock).  I think the neigh-sayers have some ulterior motives here - they don't enjoy the carriages and they don't like the fact that other people do seem to enjoy it. 

Alright, I'm going to say this is the end of the conversation about the merits of the horse carriage business.

 

Do not continue this back and forth or you may face a suspension.

 

Unless there are further developments in this story, we're done discussing this.

10 hours ago, TheCOV said:

Too late. 
 

https://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/move-up-cincinnati/city-hopes-new-pedestrian-priority-intersection-will-make-walking-through-westwood-safer?_amp=true

I don't think the implementation in Westwood is what @taestellhad in mind. That one will not have a diagonal crossing option so it's more like an improved leading pedestrian interval, than a full pedestrian scramble.

Yeah, due to the geometry of that intersection, 5th & Vine needs a diagonal crossing from the NE to the SW corner in addition to a dedicated pedestrian-only phase.