Jump to content
CincyImages

Cincinnati: Downtown: Convention Center / Hotel

Recommended Posts

I hope that if we do get a Hotel Signia that it's as tall as the Indy version. 38 stories and 800 rooms.

 

Does anyone know how tall the Millennium Hotel is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, troeros said:

I hope that if we do get a Hotel Signia that it's as tall as the Indy version. 38 stories and 800 rooms.

 

Does anyone know how tall the Millennium Hotel is? 

North Tower is 350' tall. South Tower 226' tall 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, savadams13 said:

Sorry but having worked in hospitality design for a number of years I can tell you now the south tower is not going to be financially feasible to renovate and bring up to national convention standards

 

12 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

I've noticed a trend where people, even in the profession, overestimate the renovatability of a building.


I also work in hospitality design @savadams13 we should grab a drink sometime lol. But I understand that depending on the scope of the renovation and the desired prestige level of the hotel, it could become more expensive to renovate. I've experienced first-hand the difficulty of renovating an older building up to newer hotel standards.

However, I fundamentally disagree that it's ever a good trade-off to destroy an existing structure. We honestly need comprehensive emissions/carbon taxes in place to remove the incentive of demolishing perfectly good buildings. The only exception should be if there is no way to renovate with the existing conditions (like the 8th and Main building). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Largue said:

However, I fundamentally disagree that it's ever a good trade-off to destroy an existing structure. We honestly need comprehensive emissions/carbon taxes in place to remove the incentive of demolishing perfectly good buildings. The only exception should be if there is no way to renovate with the existing conditions (like the 8th and Main building). 

 

I totally agree that it's a massive waste of resources to throw an existing high-rise hotel tower in the landfill so that we can build a new one. However until we have serious incentives in place to encourage building reuse/discourage demolition (and I think you need both), I don't see how the Millennium would be saved. Our city doesn't even do a good job of preventing the demolition of buildings that are highly desirable and easily convertible to another use (e.g. Dennison Hotel).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't get demolishing a tower over things inside being 1 foot too close to each other. I don't think people are going to be as fat as they are now forever. And people now have one kid at age 40 instead of 8 kids by 25 like they did in the '70s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish someone with the authority had the forethought to work out a deal with 3CDC to allow for future expansion of the Convention Center into the 84.51 building.  Don't know if was possible logistically, but recall seeing where Columbus built a garage near their Convention Center that would allow for future expansion by converting some of the garage floors for the Convention Center. With the pending Millennium Hotel sale, the Convention Center could have picked up another block assuming an Elm St. closure was doable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ArtChelle1 said:

Wish someone with the authority had the forethought to work out a deal with 3CDC to allow for future expansion of the Convention Center into the 84.51 building.  Don't know if was possible logistically, but recall seeing where Columbus built a garage near their Convention Center that would allow for future expansion by converting some of the garage floors for the Convention Center. With the pending Millennium Hotel sale, the Convention Center could have picked up another block assuming an Elm St. closure was doable.

 

The 84.51 building's parking garage was built the ability to convert the garage into more office space for 84.51. However 3CDC is making so much money from the garage that they're not going to allow those floors to be converted to office space, which is why 84.51 is likely going to expand into a different building downtown.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

The 84.51 building's parking garage was built the ability to convert the garage into more office space for 84.51. However 3CDC is making so much money from the garage that they're not going to allow those floors to be converted to office space, which is why 84.51 is likely going to expand into a different building downtown.

84.51 has a terrible legal department if they didn't get the ability to expand in their own building written in a contract.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

I just don't get demolishing a tower over things inside being 1 foot too close to each other. I don't think people are going to be as fat as they are now forever. And people now have one kid at age 40 instead of 8 kids by 25 like they did in the '70s.

It Is about what the public wants and is willing to pay more for. Will they pay for a room in a revamped Millennium, YES. Will they pay MORE for a room at the BRAND NEW HILTON SIGNIA. You Bet!  - The idea is that it is more than a hotel, it needs to be a statement. you cant make the statement reusing the old hotel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a wonky angled pic fro the Carew Tower  to illustrate the blocks of low buildings surrounding the Millennium. Blocks & Blocks of ugly white roofs!  Such a shame that any expansion of the convention center would take up even more downtown real estate vs bridging the otherwise useless land above the expressways. I cropped out the Hyatt but it is the only direct neighbor with any height at all. No new info i just happened to be up there with the kids last weekend and noticed this.

EC8NnF3XsAUdJvF.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked up the plans for the Washington State Convention Center expansion in Downtown Seattle, and was surprised to see that the new building is six stories tall (most of the upper floors are meeting rooms or "flex" space, with the main exhibition space being on the ground floor), and additionally, the "expansion" is actually a separate building kitty-corner from the existing convention center building. I'm not sure if they intend to split very big conventions between the two buildings, or if the new building will be like the "new" convention center for bigger conventions and the old building used for smaller ones.

 

If other convention centers in the US are starting to build vertically instead of obsessing about how much continuous, uninterrupted floor space they have on a single level ... I am confused why we can't do the same.

 

hillclimb_down_day.jpg

hillclimb_up_day.jpg

WSCC_-_Rendering_-_Aerial_-_850_x_700.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boston and San Francisco also have vertical convention centers (Hynes and Moscone Centers); I'm sure there are plenty of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting tidbits....

 

If Vandercar is able to move this project forward, the anticipated timeline would be to close on the purchase of the Millennium in late 2019. Demolition would then start in early 2020, with construction of the new hotel starting in the fourth quarter of 2020.



The expected opening for the new hotel would late 2022 or early 2023, depending upon the size and amount of meeting space.

“While many necessary details will naturally continue to be discussed as the project develops, the community won’t have the option of doing so if the deal is not completed,” the letter states. “We ask our local officials to help reach an agreement securing the necessary control in a timely manner."

 

The agreement would make Vandercar the developer of the hotel, Piper Jaffray the underwriter of the bonds and BradleyPayne the financial adviser along with PFM. Other members of the redevelopment team would include KMK Underwriters Bond Counsel, Skanska USA, Elevar Design Group and Hilton Corp., as the manager of the new proposed Signia or Hilton hotel.



 

Calvert said a new headquarters hotel would need to have 800 rooms and 60,000 square feet of meeting space. She is encouraging the county to continue to work with all parties involved to make sure the city has a headquarters hotel.

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/09/16/city-state-hotel-associations-support-millennium.html?iana=hpmvp_cinci_news_headline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So i told my young sons that the Millennium may come down soon and they asked a question that stumped me. Ill ask here to see what you all think. Do you think it will be imploded? What was the last place that was? I remember the old Olestra plant in St. Bernard but before that was it all the way back to Sander Hall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess that, due to its proximity to other buildings, they won't be able to implode it. It will likely be taken down slowly with a wrecking ball, like the Pogue's Garage was.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SleepyLeroy said:

So i told my young sons that the Millennium may come down soon and they asked a question that stumped me. Ill ask here to see what you all think. Do you think it will be imploded? What was the last place that was? I remember the old Olestra plant in St. Bernard but before that was it all the way back to Sander Hall?

 

Demolition, would be strip the building down to bare bones, and then wrecking ball very carefully. North Tower is so close to Elm and Sixth, so both streets would be closed. The south tower, big issue is the 84.51 building. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, lobanio0 said:

 

The main takeaway is that there are preliminary renders from the developer showing integration and expansion of the Convention Center on this parcel with the hotel. 

 

The expansion would close Elm street between 5th and 6th. 


“All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.”
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will essentially be a more modern version of what is there from a height perspective. 30 Stores on top of a convention hall. May be a bit taller, but it will not add a new building to the skyline, maybe some height, but it will make it look more modern, which is not a bad thing.

 

Personally, I am not a fan of closing off Elm. You will kill any potential street life on 6th and North and you are dividing the CBD into 2 separate areas. If you are living on say 7th and Elm, it makes it does not make it appealing to live there and say walk to PBS or a business on West Fourth. It cuts off the CBD from city Hall. If you were staying at the Hyatt as a visitor and you wanted to walk to St. Peter in Chains, it makes it more difficult. It makes it harder to develop office/apartment/street retail in the NW quadrant of downtown with this expansion.

 

I don't know a better option, (personally I would go over 6th, but probably much more expensive) but that is the main issue I have going that direction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a general question, but is the concern of, "lack of activation" still present even if you add mixed use development with hundreds/thousands of new residence in the surrounding area?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, troeros said:

Just a general question, but is the concern of, "lack of activation" still present even if you add mixed use development with hundreds/thousands of new residence in the surrounding area?

 

 

 

Yes


www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding thousands of new residents in that part of downtown makes it that much more outrageous that you would close off one of the streets that pedestrians can currently use to get around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Wally said:

If the rendering is accurate, I'm counting about 30 stories above the top of the convention center expansion.

 

 

 

That is what the news is reporting. I believe the current hotel is about 35 stories. The new one will be about the same if you count the convention center floors and then probably higher with the new top will probably make it taller.

 

11 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

Closing off Elm is a terrible idea. This city has been marring and mutilating itself for years. It really does seem like we will never learn 

Agreed, but from the financing standpoint, it may be the only realistic option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

That is what the news is reporting. I believe the current hotel is about 35 stories. The new one will be about the same if you count the convention center floors and then probably higher with the new top will probably make it taller.

 

Agreed, but from the financing standpoint, it may be the only realistic option.

 

How many stories does a new construction building need to be in order to peak out of cincy's skyline? Just curious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, troeros said:

 

How many stories does a new construction building need to be in order to peak out of cincy's skyline? Just curious. 

The current tower is a significant tower on the West side of town. If you are coming from 75 or River Road, it is significant. It is also significant from the North side of town. You can see it from the River too but it blends in more and is not as prominent because the main tower sits on 6th street. You cant see it from the East side of town which is understandable.

 

I imagine the new tower will occupy the same position. Not be much taller and not really offer a huge addition when viewed from the river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Agreed, but from the financing standpoint, it may be the only realistic option.

 

Thats how Cincinnati gets into these situations. “Need to expand convention center” becomes some infallible common knowledge fact in everyone’s head and then the path of least resistance is taken. But there are always options. Perhaps we don’t need to expand the space at all and do nothing, or just build a hotel. Perhaps we drop the micro parochialism and have NKY build a state of the art convention center on the HUGE plot of land adjacent tot their convention center they have open waiting to be developed. Perhaps we say the convention center space doesn’t need to be contiguous and build an expansion east of Elm that leaves Elm Street intact. Perhaps we build a series of exhibition halls on the Fort Washington Way caps. What shouldn’t happen is for the plan to be fully formed and then leaders are pressured into a yes or no vote

 

Edited by thebillshark
  • Like 1

www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

Closing off Elm is a terrible idea. This city has been marring and mutilating itself for years. It really does seem like we will never learn 

 

Agreed.  It'll turn the area around Cincinnati Bell into even more of an ignored corner of Downtown. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thebillshark said:

 

Thats how Cincinnati gets into these situations. “Need to expand convention center” becomes some infallible common knowledge fact in everyone’s head and then the path of least resistance is taken. But there are always options. Perhaps we don’t need to expand the space at all and do nothing, or just build a hotel. Perhaps we drop the micro parochialism and have NKY build a state of the art convention center on the HUGE plot of land adjacent tot their convention center they have open waiting to be developed. Perhaps we say the convention center space doesn’t need to be contiguous and build an expansion east of Elm that leaves Elm Street intact. Perhaps we build a series of exhibition halls on the Fort Washington Way caps. But what seems to happen is these schemes are fully formed first and then leaders are pressured into a yes or no vote 

 

 

Personally, I would expand North over 6th street. Leave the millennium as a cheaper priced option to cater to visitors. Put a new Convention Hotel on the 5th street lot the city owns or over the new 6th street expansion, but that would be my wish list.

 

The only way I would have considered closing Elm is if they built an arena over that area to connect to the convention center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill is exactly right. There's just a complete inability for Cincinnati and Hamilton County leaders to think outside the box. Closing down a block of Plum Street to expand the existing convention center another 1/2 block is the cheapest/laziest/worst option. Less than 2 weeks ago, I shared the following in this thread:

 

On 9/11/2019 at 2:21 PM, taestell said:

I just looked up the plans for the Washington State Convention Center expansion in Downtown Seattle, and was surprised to see that the new building is six stories tall (most of the upper floors are meeting rooms or "flex" space, with the main exhibition space being on the ground floor), and additionally, the "expansion" is actually a separate building kitty-corner from the existing convention center building. I'm not sure if they intend to split very big conventions between the two buildings, or if the new building will be like the "new" convention center for bigger conventions and the old building used for smaller ones.

 

If other convention centers in the US are starting to build vertically instead of obsessing about how much continuous, uninterrupted floor space they have on a single level ... I am confused why we can't do the same.

 

hillclimb_down_day.jpg

hillclimb_up_day.jpg

WSCC_-_Rendering_-_Aerial_-_850_x_700.jpg

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Personally, I would expand North over 6th street. Leave the millennium as a cheaper priced option to cater to visitors. Put a new Convention Hotel on the 5th street lot the city owns or over the new 6th street expansion, but that would be my wish list.

 

The only way I would have considered closing Elm is if they built an arena over that area to connect to the convention center.

 

...and if they do close it, I'd hope that they'd create some sort of pedestrian/bike underpass.  I think they're really underestimating how much Elm St. is used. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Personally, I would expand North over 6th street. Leave the millennium as a cheaper priced option to cater to visitors. Put a new Convention Hotel on the 5th street lot the city owns or over the new 6th street expansion, but that would be my wish list.

 

Expanding over Sixth is another option, not great but I agree better than closing down Elm. Another option could be building up and adding another story for the main exhibition hall that could continuously expand over the streets onto other blocks without closing streets down. Theres always options, but closing down Elm is a terrible one 


www.cincinnatiideas.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

...and if they do close it, I'd hope that they'd create some sort of pedestrian/bike underpass.  I think they're really underestimating how much Elm St. is used. 

While something, It still creates a cavern that would keep pedestrians from using that area. Almost better just to keep it open to cars.  It would probably create a nice wind tunnel and be fairly intimidating for pedestrians to cross under an expanded center. Closing off Elm is jus ta bad idea. Especially since you only gain 1/2 a block.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is someone able to post a rendering of the proposed development?

 

Or can this be found Ina city planning commission packet/vandercarr website? Just curious how the enquirer got access. Not paying for this subscriber Bs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...