Jump to content

Featured Replies

there is definitely too much going on.  the crenelated/historic portion should be the tallest & most prominent. and the building needs a better base/middle/cap.  i would lower the top floor height and push the portions of the top floor on either side of the tower far back - maybe add a trellis across the front, get rid of the ground level railings altogether, switch out the windows and make the top floor and insets a darker metal panel/hardi/ceramic tile and keep the main parts brick & stone.  even then, i still dont care for it
image.png.546c0db6ccb33b4c9d290f05a7d25f12.png

  • Replies 206
  • Views 20.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Received word that we've received the $4.7mm Brownfield Remediation grant we applied for, timelines are tentative but we're hoping to start remediation and demo work in the next two or three months.

  • The whole "renters don't invest in their neighborhood" line is so tired and comes from a place born out of racist/anti-poor attitudes. Home ownership isn't the end-all-be-all of housing. It's ridiculo

  • I'm the development manager for the project.

Posted Images

On 11/14/2024 at 1:13 PM, jack.c.amos said:

there is definitely too much going on.  the crenelated/historic portion should be the tallest & most prominent. and the building needs a better base/middle/cap.  i would lower the top floor height and push the portions of the top floor on either side of the tower far back - maybe add a trellis across the front, get rid of the ground level railings altogether, switch out the windows and make the top floor and insets a darker metal panel/hardi/ceramic tile and keep the main parts brick & stone.  even then, i still dont care for it
image.png.546c0db6ccb33b4c9d290f05a7d25f12.png

Appreciate the feedback, totally agree on the prominence of the clocktower. Unfortunately dropping the height of the floors would in turn reduce ceiling heights. Could look at sinking the ground floor, but then it wouldn't be level with the grade of the site/existing buildings. Worth looking into, at least.

  • 3 months later...

Mass demo work started this week at 4575 Eastern Ave.

thumbnail_IMG_5747.jpg

I saw the action start up earlier this week and even went by it this morning. They make quick work

Glad this is happening. That area needs some life. 

  • 2 months later...
On 4/8/2021 at 3:09 PM, Dev said:

A developer, BMC Visions, has approached the City for a zone change that would eventually allow them to build an 80-unit apartment complex located at 3754 - 4759 Beechmont Court and 4761 - 4773 Bloor Avenue in Linwood. The current proposal asks to change the zoning from Manufacturing Limited (ML) to Planned Development (PD) for the roughly 2.2 acre site. The site would include 84 units, all 1-bedroom, and 96 surface parking spaces for a ratio of 1.14 spots per unit. 70 of the 84 units are at 650 sqft with the rest being 750 or 950 sqft. There will also be 13 marked on-street parking spaces created on an expanded Bloor Avenue. There is a pool, fitness center and a small public café in the plan. There will also be bike and kayak racks.

Interestingly, the 3 existing billboard's are an adjacent lot and the owner will not sell. They are now non-conforming and could not be replaced if removed. The site is in the 100-year flood plain but only needs to be lifted a few feet higher to get out. The developer is aware of the potential redesign of the Wooster and Beechmont intersection and does not believe that this interferes with that. The Linwood Community Council voted against the development.

More at the City Planning department's website.

BEECHMONT CIRCLE APARTMENTS.jpg


I noticed that site clearance had started out at this site. You have to be careful what you wish for. Instead of an apartment to house at least 84 more residents, this is now going to be a Citadel Self Storage facility with "one or more jobs."

At the end of March, Citadel Beechmont LLC purchased these 10 properties from BMC Vision LLC for $1.5 million. In April, they then merged all of the properties into one parcel, the future 3674 Beechmont Court. The mailing address for the property is the same as Cushman & Wakefield in Louisville, which is also the address for the LLC that owns the existing Citadel Self Storage off Ridge.

Previously in February, the project team was awarded a Clean Air Improvement Program grant from the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority:

Citadel Beechmont, LLC is approved for up to $7.25 million in bond financing to support clean air improvements as part of a new mixed-use building at 3674 Beechmont Court, which provides additional warehouse, office and climate-controlled storage as part of an underutilized parcel of land in Cincinnati. The project includes energy-efficient upgrades which will include a 27.9 kW-DC solar array, as well as advanced HVAC and LED lighting systems. The project is validated to achieve a 57.5 percent reduction in energy usage.

Looking through the meeting minutes, they stated the project will be completed by spring 2026, that zoning relief will not be needed, and that they are donating land for the city right of way.

10 minutes ago, Dev said:

Previously in February, the project team was awarded a Clean Air Improvement Program grant from the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority:

I know some people at the City have looked into ideas to limit the seemingly inexorable growth of self-storage facilities, and it's hard since so many of the projects are simply permitted by right under existing zoning. Seems kinda nutty that at the State level, they're encouraging this kind of project through their bond financing. As you say, the project will barely have any ongoing employment (which is probably why it's attractive to the investors with low operating costs). Just doesn't seem to be in the public interest, especially when that land has viable, higher use with developers actively trying to build residential.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.