It looks like permits were issued for 441 Vine (same address as Boi Na Braza) for "change of use from restaurant into a bank". Which is kind of interesting...that space is way too big for a regular bank branch. And also interesting if that would be the preference of the ownership of the building? 

If it's going to be a bank, I'm going to assume it's going to be for Bank of America's expansion into Ohio.  "Flagship" location, but I dunno.

1 minute ago, ColDayMan said:

If it's going to be a bank, I'm going to assume it's going to be for Bank of America's expansion into Ohio.  "Flagship" location, but I dunno.

 

That would make sense as they have their temporary ATM setup slightly south on Vine. And i guess it could fill the space with some offices for some of their personal wealth team. From the landlords perspective BofA guaranteed lease makes more sense than a restaurant. 

Or one of those "Capital One Cafes" I keep hearing about... 

Capital One has no plans for a Rustbelt expansion anytime soon so doubtful.

Hopefully boi Na Braza still decides to stay in the urban core. I could see an otr location do really well for them imo.

Boi Na Braza's website still lists a Cincinnati location and says "we are moving, details coming soon."

1 hour ago, taestell said:

Boi Na Braza's website still lists a Cincinnati location and says "we are moving, details coming soon."

"We are moving" and "undergoing renovation" are just Cincinnatian for "permanently closed" cough*brueggers* cough

I'm now hearing that it will be a bank branch, but not BoA...

8 hours ago, taestell said:

I'm now hearing that it will be a bank branch, but not BoA...

Chase Bank is what I have heard. Moving from there small Fourth Street location. 

Any more banks on the square and we'll be forced to rename it Bank Branch Square!

Half of Boi Na Braza will become a Chase Bank.   The other half does not have a tenant yet.  

 

Chase will be right on the corner.  Half of Boi Na Braza still makes for a huge bank branch.  

Heard a rumour regarding the Macy building. Apperantly it's set to become a 45' story tower. Anyone hear anything similar to this?

Edited April 8, 20196 yr by troeros

3 minutes ago, troeros said:

Heard a rumour regarding the Macy building. Apperantly it's set to become a 45' story tower. Anyone hear anything similar to this?

 

45 feet? 

 

2 hours ago, troeros said:

Heard a rumour regarding the Macy building. Apperantly it's set to become a 45' story tower. Anyone hear anything similar to this?

 

Depending on the height of the floors, wouldn't that make it a good contender to be the new tallest in the city? If the rumor is true of course.

Is the base capable of going above 22 stories? 

I believe the current base can support an additional 18-20 but it’s based on what material they use:

 

A plan from Towne Properties, one of the original four partners that led the development of Fountain Place, to build a residential tower is no longer active, Chad Munitz, Towne's vice president of development, told The Enquirer. Fountain Place can accommodate a new building between 18 and 20 stories tall and 300,000 square feet of new development, Munitz said in email messages to city officials obtained by The Enquirer.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/95432218

Edited April 9, 20196 yr by lobanio0

If the source of the alleged rumor is Scottfordtvguy's twitter feed, then I would advise you to consider the source.  Of course, having said that, keeping my fingers crossed.  

 

2 hours ago, troeros said:

Is the base capable of going above 22 stories? 

 

The base could always be replaced. Not saying that it's the most economical way to develop the parcel but it is a possibility.

 

 

2 hours ago, lobanio0 said:

I believe the current base can support an additional 18-20 but it’s based on what material they use:

 

A plan from Towne Properties, one of the original four partners that led the development of Fountain Place, to build a residential tower is no longer active, Chad Munitz, Towne's vice president of development, told The Enquirer. Fountain Place can accommodate a new building between 18 and 20 stories tall and 300,000 square feet of new development, Munitz said in email messages to city officials obtained by The Enquirer.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/95432218

 

That article is over two years old now. Plus didn't 3CDC buy the property? So essentially any old plans for the site are pretty much null and void at this point.

Edited April 9, 20196 yr by Cincy_Travels

If true, at 45 stories this would most certainly be taller than Carew. Especially if it has some sort of crown/roof treatment. Wouldn’t this need a large tenant to start first?

4 minutes ago, Rabbit Hash said:

If true, at 45 stories this would most certainly be taller than Carew. Especially if it has some sort of crown/roof treatment. Wouldn’t this need a large tenant to start first?

I would think for them to consider building something that tall that they would have to have a pretty large tenant (Kroger or Fifth Third) or even a lot modium sized tenants already committed to the building. My guess would be that it will be mixed use. I wonder if 

6 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

I would think for them to consider building something that tall that they would have to have a pretty large tenant (Kroger or Fifth Third) or even a lot modium sized tenants already committed to the building. My guess would be that it will be mixed use. I wonder if 

 

I don't see any of the big companies downtown building a new tower (I've always speculated that as Kroger has grown in the past decade and is now starting to take on an entire tech side to the business, they might want to build a modern tower). I could absolutely see a mixed use tower with a handful of medium-sized businesses (maybe some from the suburbs?), some condos, apartments, and a hotel. I hate thinking about this because I'm fully expecting some dinky 5 story yuppy box. 

23 minutes ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

I don't see any of the big companies downtown building a new tower (I've always speculated that as Kroger has grown in the past decade and is now starting to take on an entire tech side to the business, they might want to build a modern tower). I could absolutely see a mixed use tower with a handful of medium-sized businesses (maybe some from the suburbs?), some condos, apartments, and a hotel. I hate thinking about this because I'm fully expecting some dinky 5 story yuppy box. 

I would think that 3cdc knows that a new tower is what’s best for that spot and that it is what most people are wanting. I’m optimistic but I don’t think it’ll be 45 floors. I’d say at max maybe 25.

6 minutes ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

I would think that 3cdc knows that a new tower is what’s best for that spot and that it is what most people are wanting. I’m optimistic but I don’t think it’ll be 45 floors. I’d say at max maybe 25.

 

Yeah, I'm sure everyone knows that a tower is best for that location. I'm just terrified that someone's going to let any ole' proposal get plopped there. I can think of very few places that have that Manhattan feel of an urban plaza surrounded by high-rises and I would only want that to be enhanced by a quality tower. 20-25 is probably about right. 

6 minutes ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

Yeah, I'm sure everyone knows that a tower is best for that location. I'm just terrified that someone's going to let any ole' proposal get plopped there. I can think of very few places that have that Manhattan feel of an urban plaza surrounded by high-rises and I would only want that to be enhanced by a quality tower. 20-25 is probably about right. 

Well hopefully whatever they build it’s not just a square box. I actually really like the reztark rendering for the site. I think an all glass tower would be nice . 

13 hours ago, cincity said:

If the source of the alleged rumor is Scottfordtvguy's twitter feed, then I would advise you to consider the source.  Of course, having said that, keeping my fingers crossed.  

 

That guy is a total nut, I would advise you to not take anything he says seriously.

11 hours ago, Ucgrad2015 said:

I would think that 3cdc knows that a new tower is what’s best for that spot and that it is what most people are wanting. I’m optimistic but I don’t think it’ll be 45 floors. I’d say at max maybe 25.

 

Classic Cincinnati. What we lack in aspiration height and signature pieces we make up for in urban-canyon, and architectural density in the CBD.

Overheard on 700wlw this morning discussing 3cdc and fountain square development. 

 

Apperantly the book store owner is angry right now. Lost 25% of sales, escelators don't work so hard to reach his store, AC/Heat have been cut off. He's contemplating suing the city/3cdc (?) if the conditions don't change. 

 

Apperantly city council are having an economic and development meeting today regarding fountain square and discussions about whether apartments can be constructed above. 

Why does a meeting need to take place to determine if apartments can go above?  Wasn't the building designed and zoned already for that?  This process has already and will continue to take way too long.  Either build something on top of the existing building or knock it down and build something new.  There's no reason it should sit 90+% empty in that prime location.  And if the bookstore owner is having issues with things in the building not working he should sue whoever the owner is.  I would be furious with what has transpired lately if I was him.  

I would imagine the number of large projects at play right now is testing the bandwidth of city hall. Heck, you barely even hear about the streetcar anymore. Then you've got Liberty Street, FCC (and everything involved with that), the Convention Center, Columbia Parkway, the Banks music venue and Hilltop Concrete, this (Fountain Square), short-term rental regs, pedestrian safety improvements, District 1/5, big transit decisions upcoming, random neighborhood stuff, and on top of all that the regular business of the city. It must be exhausting. 

 

(And just imagine the things we don’t already know about.)

 

 

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by Pdrome513

Especially considering the fact that council is supposed to a part-time position in this city.

I feel like this city council has encountered the most projects in the shortest time versus all the proceeding council's in the past decade. Big testament to the strong economic development growth of our city, but I can definitely see how city council can start becoming a tad overwhelmed with their council dockets nowadays. 

 

 

O no the government employees actually have to do some work in a city where there is demand for economic development?  The horror.  

1 hour ago, Pdrome513 said:

I would imagine the number of large projects at play right now is testing the bandwidth of city hall. Heck, you barely even hear about the streetcar anymore. Then you've got Liberty Street, FCC (and everything involved with that), the Convention Center, Columbia Parkway, the Banks music venue and Hilltop Concrete, this (Fountain Square), short-term rental regs, pedestrian safety improvements, District 1/5, big transit decisions upcoming, random neighborhood stuff, and on top of all that the regular business of the city. It must be exhausting. 

 

(And just imagine the things we don’t already know about.)

 

1 hour ago, Pdrome513 said:

 

 

Great list, BTW. And yes, when you stop to think about it, there is a lot going on. Nashville boom what?

2 minutes ago, Rabbit Hash said:

 

Great list, BTW. And yes, when you stop to think about it, there is a lot going on. Nashville boom what?

 

New construction is much more conspicuous than rehabs.  DT Cincinnati has had 15+ large downtown buildings rehabbed in the past few years into residential and hotels.  If those had instead been new construction with cranes, everyone would think Cincinnati is booming. 

 

5 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

New construction is much more conspicuous than rehabs.  DT Cincinnati has had 15+ large downtown buildings rehabbed in the past few years into residential and hotels.  If those had instead been new construction with cranes, everyone would think Cincinnati is booming. 

 

 

That's a good point.  I would also add that having council involved in all of these projects is not a good thing.  That's what planning commissions and zoning offices are for (and there's no reason some of the same people can't serve on both), but when council or the mayor get involved directly it's usually because of some quid pro quo situation or other parochial concerns that simply don't scale. 

2 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

 

That's a good point.  I would also add that having council involved in all of these projects is not a good thing.  That's what planning commissions and zoning offices are for (and there's no reason some of the same people can't serve on both), but when council or the mayor get involved directly it's usually because of some quid pro quo situation or other parochial concerns that simply don't scale. 

 

And that's why Crancel has to be involved in everything. He owes. I just weep for the Skyhouse when I go to Yeatmans Cove. Cookie cutter but would have been beautiful on that river front.

16 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

New construction is much more conspicuous than rehabs.  DT Cincinnati has had 15+ large downtown buildings rehabbed in the past few years into residential and hotels.  If those had instead been new construction with cranes, everyone would think Cincinnati is booming. 

 

Right, for the past 5+ years, it seems like there has been a steady flow of developers buying up historic buildings and rehabbing them into apartments or hotels or office space. At some point, we will be all caught up on rehabbing existing buildings and then we will see more new buildings going up on vacant lots. Assuming the market stays strong.

2 hours ago, Cincy513 said:

O no the government employees actually have to do some work in a city where there is demand for economic development?  The horror.  

Agreed, but when you have private sector developers and their high-priced consultants facing up against overworked and less experienced (with regards to big projects) government employees the opportunity for the government and its citizens to be taken for a ride increases greatly.

3 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

 

That's a good point.  I would also add that having council involved in all of these projects is not a good thing.  That's what planning commissions and zoning offices are for (and there's no reason some of the same people can't serve on both), but when council or the mayor get involved directly it's usually because of some quid pro quo situation or other parochial concerns that simply don't scale. 

 

 

Council is involved solely because there are a lot of egos there who like to grandstand and take full credit for a project that they really did little if anything  ----- cough - P.G. ----- Cough cough-----

25 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

 

 

Council is involved solely because there are a lot of egos there who like to grandstand and take full credit for a project that they really did little if anything  ----- cough - P.G. ----- Cough cough-----

 

Or.....because Council has to approve all zone changes? Guess that's not dramatic enough of a reason for you, but it's pretty much the whole story.

16 minutes ago, edale said:

 

Or.....because Council has to approve all zone changes? Guess that's not dramatic enough of a reason for you, but it's pretty much the whole story.

 

If we expanded the FBC or even enacted the long-dormant Land Development Code, these PD zone changes would be needed less since more urbanist development would be permitted by-right. Removing parking requirements are a start, but that only goes so far.

 

My sense is that the Council and the Mayor like to play with these projects for political points so it's not going to happen in this era of Cincinnati history.

That's precisely why Cranley killed Form Based Code in Cincinnati. With a FBC developers who wanted to invest their money in this city could just...do it. Without FBC, they have to suck up to politicians first.

Couple of things from yesterday’s meeting:

5/3 will be putting up a smaller crane in front of rock bottom on their property line, this will be to assist in the removing of the facade, with the debris bin being on vine. I believe they said this will go up in May depending on permits and will come down Feb-March next year. Also  they mentioned the North west  part of the plaza could be closed. 

Additionally 5/3 will be building a permanent stage closer to their entrance looking west, I couldn’t really make out the presentation.  

Edited May 1, 20196 yr by lobanio0

42 minutes ago, lobanio0 said:

Couple of things from yesterday’s meeting:

5/3 will be putting up a smaller crane in front of rock bottom on their property line, this will be to assist in the removing of the facade, with the debris bin being on vine. I believe they said this will go up in May depending on permits and will come down Feb-March next year. Also  they mentioned the North wasn’t part oth the plaza could be closed. 

Additionally 5/3 will be building a permanent stage closer to their entrance looking west, I couldn’t really make out the presentation.  

The new stage, will be mirrored opposite of where it is located now on the square. So the back of the stage will butt up to the Fifth Third Tower. Which is what the original proposal was back in 2007 when they redid the square and 5/3 wanted the stage on the opposite end. I was interning on that project and remember the fighting over the stage placement. I am sad to see the glass rainscreen going away along the south side of the annex building. I cant remember the amount of countless hours working on details for that glass screen with the LED lights....

So are there going to be two stages?  Or will this new one replace the existing one?  

Currently they just bring in a temporary festival-style stage for all of the summer concerts and gets torn down when they put up the skating rink for the winter. Having a permanent stage will be nice but I enjoyed the location on the west side of the square.

7 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

So are there going to be two stages?  Or will this new one replace the existing one?  

 

The temporary stage location will disappear for a permanent stage as mentioned by Travis. However I have not heard if they will demo the granite platform the temporary stage sits on during the warmer months of the year, or if it will just remain. 

5/3 doesn't have the air rights over the former Macy's anymore, do they? It would be nice if this project were done in conjunction with whatever the plans come to be for the Macy's site. Not that there would necessarily be much interaction between the two spaces, but there could be.

 

It's a little disappointing that the public has lost all say in what happens to the city's main "public" square. Hopefully it turns out nice anyway.

They also mentioned a new LED screen above Macy’s being paid for by 5/3. Along with a yearly maintenance program. It does sound like this will be 5/3 square soon enough.