Author Topic: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News  (Read 22986 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #330 on: July 09, 2018, 02:14:20 PM »
They have probably not put the final top layer of asphalt down yet. The city typically grinds down the existing street and puts down one layer of asphalt; comes back over the next few weeks to do curb repair, utility work, etc.; then comes back (sometimes many months later) to put down the final top layer of asphalt.

Offline oakiehigh

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 3049
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #331 on: July 09, 2018, 08:00:00 PM »
^A bunch of West End streets were done last year in the manner Jake speaks of.   See Baymiller and Freeman.   The streets were in better shape prior to the shoddy repaving job they did.

Offline JYP

  • Global Moderator
  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1589
    • Urban Cincy
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #332 on: July 09, 2018, 08:10:52 PM »
They repaved Sycamore by Zeigler Park last year and waited for months to do the final finished coating. Meanwhile, everyone had to deal with sewer lids protruding out and no crosswalks. When I worked for Bellevue, we did our resurfacing in the fall and did all of it as quickly as possible.

I also found it hilarious this spring when the city put down zebra stripe crossings at Walnut and 14th only to begin resurfacing the road less than a week later. The temporary lines are the conventional two strips across the street. We'll see if they return after the final coating.

One step forward, two steps back.
“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9124
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #333 on: July 09, 2018, 08:22:37 PM »
Sometimes you have to wait all winter for the final course because the asphalt plants shut down.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #334 on: July 10, 2018, 09:21:43 PM »
One of the more bizarre home renovations I've seen in CUF:
https://www.sibcycline.com/Listing/CIN/1587421/2241-Flora-St-Clifton-OH-45219

Instead of the ol' illegal front bedroom trick...they put an entire FULL BATHROOM IN THE FRONT FAMILY ROOM.  LIKE IN THE ROOM.  If the house did not originally have a half bath on the first floor, I can't explain the motivation for the full bathroom. 

Up on the third floor, one bedroom has a door but the other is just...open.  They could have put that full bathroom up there. 

Then, despite having gravel parking behind the house off of Coon St., they recently bought an adjacent lot facing Fox St. and poured a huge concrete pad...space for 8+ cars, and accessible through a hole in their fence. 

If you were to buy this as a rental, you could probably illegally jam a fifth student in the front L-shaped foyer.     


Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9124
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #335 on: July 10, 2018, 10:02:22 PM »
And it just says "Clifton, OH". Clifton Ohio is near Yellow Springs. I've had suburbanite friends participate in events in OTR and tag them as Clifton Ohio. Then social media will generate a little map of the real Clifton Ohio.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #336 on: July 13, 2018, 02:53:35 PM »
And it just says "Clifton, OH". Clifton Ohio is near Yellow Springs. I've had suburbanite friends participate in events in OTR and tag them as Clifton Ohio. Then social media will generate a little map of the real Clifton Ohio.

Facebook's location data is awful. For city neighborhoods, it leaves out the actual city name and just says "Clifton, Ohio", "Pendleton, Ohio", etc. Which is problematic because many of those are actual cities in other parts of the state.

Offline JYP

  • Global Moderator
  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1589
    • Urban Cincy
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #337 on: July 13, 2018, 03:00:24 PM »
I wonder how many people are showing up to at the Clifton Mill in Clifton, OH asking if Nippert Stadium is close by?

Follow up: Of those people, how many are sticking around for the pancakes?
“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline oudd

  • Global Moderator
  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *****
  • Posts: 74
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #338 on: August 03, 2018, 03:43:44 PM »
Here's info on the Deaconess development: http://res.cloudinary.com/courbanize-production/v1/timeline_events/yojdkiaxeargg56tdv7y

From the story on Business Courier: https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/08/03/here-s-what-s-being-planned-for-the-former.html

180 hotel rooms, 750 housing units, 100,000 square feet of office space and 100,000 square feet of retail space.

Quote
Also expected to be included in the development is a small-format grocer or market along with a large entertainment venue that could take the form of a cinemas or bowling concept.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #339 on: August 03, 2018, 04:03:30 PM »
They really shouldn't be tearing down the historic part of the hospital. 

Offline oudd

  • Global Moderator
  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *****
  • Posts: 74
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #340 on: August 03, 2018, 04:04:44 PM »
Yeah, I was surprised at that. I like a lot in the proposal, but it seems like that building would be really easy to convert into a hotel.

Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #341 on: August 03, 2018, 04:35:55 PM »
That's a substantial plan. That's a TON of developed square footage. I'm most interested in the B schemes that have a little more variety in height. That spot is so high in elevation that anything of the height shown would have incredible views.

I'm not super fond of demolishing the existing hotel building, BUT if they actually develop something of worthwhile quality I think it could be a net improvement.

I'm concerned though about the 100,000 square feet of retail. I feel there's already too much retail around UC, does this development really justify another 100,000 square feet? That's like 3 more UPA buildings...that seems problematic to me.

Offline GCrites80s

  • Premium Member
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • ***
  • Posts: 9124
  • 1492 or 4,192?
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #342 on: August 03, 2018, 04:41:58 PM »
MORE FAST CASUAL AT $30/SF!

Offline ucgrady

  • Rhodes Tower 629'
  • ***
  • Posts: 518
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #343 on: August 03, 2018, 04:53:11 PM »
Wow, that project is huge. Agree with the others that the historic hospital building should stay, but love the idea of that much density near campus. Soon we may need better transit in uptown to move all these people around...

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #344 on: August 03, 2018, 05:11:53 PM »
The thing is...how much denser will this be than Deaconess Hospital was 10 years ago when it was still a major hospital with an ER and research?  From the city's perspective, it is a major loss of revenue, although the psychiatric stuff moved to the old Jewish Hospital building on Burnett. 

Look how the Tri-Delts defiantly refuse to sell. 


Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #345 on: August 03, 2018, 05:18:49 PM »
Well, 750 units (looks like an average of around 1,000 square feet so likely two bedrooms) is likely around 1200-1500 people depending on how they're situated, 100,000 square feet of office is between 500-750 office workers depending on what type of office space it is, 106,500 square feet of retail is around 3 of UPA so 20-30 retail establishments, and then 170 hotel rooms which is likely another 150 or so people on a regular day (maybe more?)

So in total 1,850-2,400 people plus whatever is in the retail establishments. I wouldn't think Deaconess ever had that level of density but not sure. Maybe someone has some good numbers to compare.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2018, 02:20:52 AM by jmicha »

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #346 on: August 04, 2018, 04:57:26 PM »
It looks like both the Tri-Delts and the Jewish Center refused to sell, which is great, because otherwise this was going to inevitably turn into an ugly street wall.  Before Stratford Heights went in, Clifton was a nice modest row of eclectic residential structures from Straight up to Joselin.  The site plan for Stratford Heights is a mess and the building style is cheap and makes no sense.  Perhaps in the future we'll see the Stratford Heights apartments between Straford and Clifton rebuilt as something more substantial. 

Another mystery is the lot at the corner of Straight & University, between University and Fortune.  There was a big house there until it was torn down around 2012.  That is now a staging lot for the big product across the street.  From these drawings it's unclear what it's going to become, but it looks like they might try to jam a parking garage on it. 

Offline Yves Behar

  • Huntington Tower 330'
  • **
  • Posts: 294
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #347 on: August 06, 2018, 12:34:08 PM »
Quite the pessimistic view! Also what's wrong with Stratford Heights? As far as I have seen (inside and out) the build quality is fine. It's also student housing. Anyway it seems your sentiments are stemming from a strange fear of change more than anything that seems rational. Straight from Clifton to the top of the hill has been fairly dead for years, even when Deaconess was open. I think this project has fantastic potential to bring some life to that area.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #348 on: August 06, 2018, 01:16:08 PM »
This development is dense af. If Uptown wants to be Cincinnati's "second downtown", we need more stuff like this and less of the garbage that's going up along MLK.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #349 on: August 06, 2018, 01:25:37 PM »
Quite the pessimistic view!

Well Towne Properties got away with murder with their amazingly cheap U square development.  A handful of good historic buildings were torn down for that development.  Looks like we're going to lose the historic section of Deaconess Hospital for another burrito place topped by particle board apartments. 

Offline Yves Behar

  • Huntington Tower 330'
  • **
  • Posts: 294
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #350 on: August 06, 2018, 02:14:02 PM »
Sure if you want to base your judgement it solely on appearances, otherwise I would say that U Square has brought a lot of amenities to that area. Also recall it was a Hardee's and McDonald's for a long time, not just "Inn The Wood" or whatever else you may feel nostalgia towards.

Offline taestell

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 7728
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #351 on: August 06, 2018, 02:27:53 PM »
Agreed. Although the architecture of USquare is awful, it's probably the most "successful" Clifton Heights has ever been in terms of commercial activity and street life. The little plaza at USquare has also turned into quite an important gathering space for a neighborhood that didn't previously have that type of space.

Offline Cincy513

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 390
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #352 on: August 06, 2018, 02:29:37 PM »
Yeah while U Square looks like apts at every other college it's brought a lot of good residents, retail, restaurants and bars to previously empty area.  And before it was empty it was filled with fast food places.  It is a definite upgrade.   

Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #353 on: August 06, 2018, 02:39:17 PM »
Quite the pessimistic view!

Well Towne Properties got away with murder with their amazingly cheap U square development.  A handful of good historic buildings were torn down for that development.  Looks like we're going to lose the historic section of Deaconess Hospital for another burrito place topped by particle board apartments. 


Most of the buildings in this site plan are well above the allowable height limit for wood framed construction so they'll either be steel or concrete. So from the get go they're going to be higher quality buildings than, say, U Square.

Regardless, as Taestell mentioned, this is insanely dense. If you feel like boiling it down to "just another burrito place topped with particle board apartments" then that's you deal, but that view is pretty ignorant and lacking any sort of critical analysis and based on meaningless predictions considering it's just a rough site plan at this point.

Offline RJohnson

  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #354 on: August 06, 2018, 03:44:44 PM »
i don't remember any "historically significant" buildings in the U Square area. gas station, mcdonalds, arby, triple decker place, drive thru auto wash. Like it or not that street could have been most anywhere in the usa

Offline jmecklenborg

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15416
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #355 on: August 06, 2018, 04:02:13 PM »
Back in 2005 we were shown glistening renderings of what would be built between W. Clifton and Ohio Ave.  Underground parking, for starters, and an 8-story wall of apartments and condos.  Instead, after a 5-year delay, we got a pair of above-ground garages, a plastic apartment complex, and the Shell Station was preserved because of "neighborhood input".  Where was that survey?  Right, it didn't happen. 

The same thing is going to happen here.  Over-promise, under-deliver.  Trick everyone into thinking we're going to get high-quality buildings, then bust out the tinker toys. 

Also, I walked around Calhoun/McMillan in 1998 with a camera, and have some photos of the historic buildings that were torn down.  The area where the Fairfield Inn and Target is now, over to the Shell Station had several rows of row buildings in styles that were unique to Cincinnati. 



Offline Yves Behar

  • Huntington Tower 330'
  • **
  • Posts: 294
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #356 on: August 06, 2018, 04:10:31 PM »
Well I apologize for my optimism /s.

Offline jmicha

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4048
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #357 on: August 06, 2018, 04:57:04 PM »
Back in 2005 we were shown glistening renderings of what would be built between W. Clifton and Ohio Ave.  Underground parking, for starters, and an 8-story wall of apartments and condos.  Instead, after a 5-year delay, we got a pair of above-ground garages, a plastic apartment complex, and the Shell Station was preserved because of "neighborhood input".  Where was that survey?  Right, it didn't happen. 

The same thing is going to happen here.  Over-promise, under-deliver.  Trick everyone into thinking we're going to get high-quality buildings, then bust out the tinker toys. 

Also, I walked around Calhoun/McMillan in 1998 with a camera, and have some photos of the historic buildings that were torn down.  The area where the Fairfield Inn and Target is now, over to the Shell Station had several rows of row buildings in styles that were unique to Cincinnati. 

You're comparing renderings pre recession to buildings built post recession...that wasn't just some tactic to get everyone on board, it was a reality of the changes to the market that happened in the time it took to get the project off the ground.

The building they're already constructing is going to be higher quality than U Square. Again, because it can't be wood framed construction so it already has a better starting point.

The scale they're trying to achieve is fairly substantial and will require higher quality construction to become a reality. it's very early, so who knows how it'll pan out, but so far their first phase is already a step above the other similar developments in the area and is literally taking an ugly garage and wrapping it so the streets around are now going to be fronted with active uses. They're off to a good start.

Offline RJohnson

  • Dirt Lot 0'
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #358 on: August 06, 2018, 11:29:36 PM »
Back in 2005 we were shown glistening renderings of what would be built between W. Clifton and Ohio Ave.  Underground parking, for starters, and an 8-story wall of apartments and condos.  Instead, after a 5-year delay, we got a pair of above-ground garages, a plastic apartment complex, and the Shell Station was preserved because of "neighborhood input".  Where was that survey?  Right, it didn't happen. 

The same thing is going to happen here.  Over-promise, under-deliver.  Trick everyone into thinking we're going to get high-quality buildings, then bust out the tinker toys. 

Also, I walked around Calhoun/McMillan in 1998 with a camera, and have some photos of the historic buildings that were torn down.  The area where the Fairfield Inn and Target is now, over to the Shell Station had several rows of row buildings in styles that were unique to Cincinnati.
there were buildings. Were they unique to cincy or anywhere. I have my doubts. Maybe a photo and explanation of their uniqueness might help.

Offline Cincy513

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 390
Re: Cincinnati: CUF: Development and News
« Reply #359 on: August 07, 2018, 08:02:40 AM »
What's the cut off line between a shitty old building and a historic building?  40 years?  60 years?  80+ years?  I'm just curious because it seems like for some people every old building is a historic building.