Broadway Tower at St. Xavier Park (Downtown Cincy)

[jmecklenborg]

^Tons of potential for the area.  I remember how depressing it was when the Power and Krippendorf Buildings were empty.   Downtown effectively ended at Main St. 

I don't understand the sluggishness of the Broadway Tower's development...with the garage already in place they should be able to pounce when the market window opens considering the mediocrity of some of the sites being developed around town like whatever that thing is down on Culvert St. 

[UCplanner]

I was at the City Planning Commission meeting today and they approved a three year extension for the current developer. The devoper was VERY convincing that the market was not ready for the units. They want a quality product and would not settle for anything less. . . i am confident that they will be quickening the development of the site in the next 12-18 months.

[UncleRando]

While it is a good thing that the city is working with them and giving them an extension...it is a bad thing that they need an extension.  I know that this isn't unique to Cincy, but I don't take this as a sign of good faith from the developers.  They are just giving themselves the option to do something within the next 3 years...should they choose.  Is there any sort of penalty for them if they do nothing with the project.  I don't think there is...so this move seems rather mundane.

[UCplanner]

At the meeting, the company took great offense when Tarbell suggested exactly what you are saying. They have been losing money on this property for years and are very eager to develop. He explained how they came to the Planning Comission with a plan a few years ago that only had about 50 condos and was only 5 stories. They mutually agreed that they did not think that this was the best use of the land. This developer has worked well with the city on many projects, and explained that they are eager to develop, but are waiting for the possibility to become available to develop.

[UncleRando]

Tarbell suggested exactly what you are saying

Well great minds think alike! 

Seriously though...I want to believe them and I hope this project comes to fruition.  But until I see construction equipment I'll remain cautious.

[PhattyNati]

if they were to try and approach some semblance of affordability with this project the market is ripe...i guess thats just not the path anybody wants to take.

[UCplanner]

the problem (at least what they said) was that they would need to get a very high cost (don't remember the numbers) per square foot for condos, or almost $2 per square (a month) foot for apartments if they were to develop this site, the way that the city, and they, wanted to... There are no condo areas that are close to this value in the CBD today

[PhattyNati]

yeah, i dont doubt that to be true.  its not like they have to build more parking though.

[UncleRando]

Apartments in that area are going for about $.80-$1.20 a square ft. per month.  I agree that $2 would be an outrageous amount, but I just don't see why their costs would be sooooooo high for that project.  If the costs are the problem now, what is going to improve those cost figures in the future?  Even when the housing market catches up the construction costs won't drop.

[Alabama ExPat]

I'd really like to know what they estimated cost per  sq foot for condos was for the project to be viable. I wonder if they are aiming for the correct market for their project.  I think the high end for downtown condos is about to become saturated. 

[John Schneider]

I voted for the extension in the Planning Commission today.

The developers said they need to be able to sell the units for $260 psf or rent them for $1.60 psf/month, neither of which is attainable there right now. The only for-sale product that has come close are the Park Place condos on Lytle Park that started selling for $225 psf and ended up selling for just under $250 psf.

I think what Jim Tarbell was saying is that -- if you're a true city person -- living in the northeast quadrant of downtown is far better than living at Lytle Park, even though the market doesn't reflect that yet, far from it. When I first moved downtown, I lived at Lytle Park. It was pretty, but it felt like the suburbs. You had to get in your car to access any kind of service. So I moved closer to the center -- near the Broadway Towers in fact -- and I can tell you that it's much better, even though it looks rough to the casual observer. That's what Jim was trying to get across at the Planning Commission today. He's frustrated that the developers haven't been able to exploit what he sees as an obviously good location. And coincidentally I was talking with a resident of Park Place late today who has already concluded that a move closer-in is in the cards for her. After living downtown for a year or so, she wants a real city experience.

The problem is, the cat's out of the bag on this one. Our city already has $2 million embedded in the foundations to carry the apartment overbuild, which the developers have to pay back to the city once construction commences. So if you only build fifty units there, your starting point -- before laying the first brick of the first apartment -- is already $40,000 in cost for that apartment. The only saving grace is that the parking for the tower is already built, an avoided cost worth something, I suppose.

I'd say this is a problem, if it only were. It's a dilemma. Problems you can solve.

[Alabama ExPat]

The developers said they need to be able to sell the units for $260 psf or rent them for $1.60 psf/month, neither of which is attainable there right now. The only for-sale product that has come close are the Park Place condos on Lytle Park that started selling for $225 psf and ended up selling for just under $250 psf.

I don't know your source, but that statistic for Park Place seems to be inflated.  We added major upgrades to our unit and still came in under $200 / sqf, including appliances, floorplans, electrical configuration, trimwork, master bath reconfiguration, and flooring upgrades.  Given what I've seen in many other units, I assume our price per sqf was higher than the average.

I think what Jim Tarbell was saying is that -- if you're a true city person -- living in the northeast quadrant of downtown is far better than living at Lytle Park, even though the market doesn't reflect that yet, far from it. When I first moved downtown, I lived at Lytle Park. It was pretty, but it felt like the suburbs. You had to get in your car to access any kind of service. So I moved closer to the center -- near the Broadway Towers in fact -- and I can tell you that it's much better, even though it looks rough to the casual observer. That's what Jim was trying to get across at the Planning Commission today. He's frustrated that the developers haven't been able to exploit what he sees as an obviously good location. And coincidentally I was talking with a resident of Park Place late today who has already concluded that a move closer-in is in the cards for her. After living downtown for a year or so, she wants a real city experience.

Huh?

If I understand it, the project we're taking about is at 7th and Broadway.  That's a six block walk to the corner of 5th and Vine.  The Taft museum, the furthest spot in the Lytle park area is 7 blocks.  I guess I don't see that as being a big  difference.

I guess I should be thrilled at the thought that downtown has become such a popular destination for residency that Lytle park is now considered suburban, signifying that a block closer to the city center is much more desireable.  If this really is the true preception, then I'm happy.  It means that the notion of downtown as a desirable residential area has turned the corner.

However, as much as I would like to believe it, I don't.

[buildingcincinnati]

This wasn't mentioned in this thread, but I wanted to keep it up to date.  City council voted in favor of the agreement extension at their 3/28 meeting.  Tarbell was the only "no" vote.

[UncleRando]

As far as I'm concerned this project is dead.  In the mean time we can gawk at what could potentially be there if/when these developers do anything.

[The_Cincinnati_Kid]

New Cincinnati garage space takes bite out of apartment plans
Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Dan Monk Senior Staff Reporter

A parking expansion for Procter & Gamble Co. will cut in half a long-planned residential tower at Seventh and Broadway.

Cincinnati City Manager Milton Dohoney asked City Council this week to set aside $5 million to build a three-story parking deck atop a five-story garage already in place. The expansion was promised to P&G in June when it said it was moving 650 new jobs to downtown.

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2009/10/26/story5.html

[UncleRando]

These developers don't seem able to pull off this project.  I bet nothing happens here past the expansion of the garage.  The only way something does happen is if the City takes away the air rights extension and gives it to someone else who is more capable.

[jmecklenborg]

P&G has surely had these plans in place for a long time, meaning they've been scouting for parking for a few years.  This garage appeared to have been built at the ideal time to take advantage of the mid-decade condo boom, and since it already had the garage built, it could have beaten several other area projects to the punch.  That makes me think P&G worked out this deal years ago, the developer was probably content to get a modest return on his investment rather than risking everything during the condo boom.