Millennial Tower

[mbeaumontParticipant]

Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

[EridonyParticipant]

mbeaumont wrote:

Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

Dollar Tree Tower?

[OneBagTravelParticipant]

Finally a tower for the entitled.

[ricospazParticipant]

The sooner we look like the ‘Blade Runner’ world, the better!

[Josh BaumanParticipant]

mbeaumont wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>WJT wrote:</div>
The problem with green walls in Central Ohio is that very few things that could be incorporated into a green wall stay green for more than 6-7 months of the year. The other months you have a brown dead looking wall. Even a mass of the hardiest English Ivy would brown out/windburn in an exposed location on a building.

Good point. I already have some visual ideas for those screens. Would love to see something like this:

https://cre.tech/san-francisco-high-rise-unveils-public-art-installation-featuring-led-video-wall/

It would be interesting if they did both — a green wall that is incorporated with the screens so that when there is no greenery there could be screens — a hefty proposal on the maintenance side of things, though
It would also be nice if they added some solar panels to the roof that would power said LED screen…

[mbeaumontParticipant]

Yeah, I’d like to hear more about green tech in this proposal in general. Lots of talk about how hi-tech it’s going to be, but no talk about LEED certification, green roofs, rain gardens, or anything of that nature. Makes them feel a little out of touch with the times.

[daliasParticipant]

This proposal reminded me of the Time Tower from 2007. Hopefully this one fares better.
http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2007/05/21/story7.html?f=et178&b=1179720000%5e1464302&hbx=e_vert

[CB_downtownerParticipant]

mbeaumont wrote:

Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

I would hope it’s more than a name and in reality a serious push at finally trying to reach a badly missed demographic for downtown. I’m not talking about dirt cheap housing. There are plenty of millennials and YPs who can afford a decent place but are completely priced out by downtown inventory. I will be unbelievably disappointed if we hear that this is yet another option that completely prices out most of this generation.

And no, I am not a millennial but I understand they’re a key piece to building a better downtown.

[drtom1234Participant]

dalias wrote:

This proposal reminded me of the Time Tower from 2007. Hopefully this one fares better.

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2007/05/21/story7.html?f=et178&b=1179720000%5e1464302&hbx=e_vert

Huh, I don’t remember that proposal at all. Does the same owner still own those buildings? It could be the right time to revisit that site if he does.

[WJTParticipant]

CB_downtowner wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>mbeaumont wrote:</div>
Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

I would hope it’s more than a name and in reality a serious push at finally trying to reach a badly missed demographic for downtown. I’m not talking about dirt cheap housing. There are plenty of millennials and YPs who can afford a decent place but are completely priced out by downtown inventory. I will be unbelievably disappointed if we hear that this is yet another option that completely prices out most of this generation.

And no, I am not a millennial but I understand they’re a key piece to building a better downtown.

I would bet this is going very high end. With all of the amenities and with only 90-110 units this is going to be expensive housing. If they did try to make it less expensive they would cut amenities and value engineer the hell out of this-and they might value engineer the hell out of it anyways and we will get something much less bold. If you look at new proposals across the nation in a variety of cities and see the original proposal and then see what is built, this is quite common and disappointing-the redesigns, cutbacks, value engineering.

As someone mentioned somewhere, those huge cantilevered balconies will likely be cut back, and I would bet that screen for the parking will be replaced with something much more mundane-and cheaper.

[CB_downtownerParticipant]

WJT wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CB_downtowner wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>mbeaumont wrote:</div><br>
Looks like the name is temporary, from Business First:

Q: There was some confusion about the name Millennial, is that about the generation?

A: It’s about the generation. Ultimately we’ll hopefully have an anchor tenant that’s going to want the naming rights to the building. We would hope it would be (in place before the building opens).

I would hope it’s more than a name and in reality a serious push at finally trying to reach a badly missed demographic for downtown. I’m not talking about dirt cheap housing. There are plenty of millennials and YPs who can afford a decent place but are completely priced out by downtown inventory. I will be unbelievably disappointed if we hear that this is yet another option that completely prices out most of this generation.

And no, I am not a millennial but I understand they’re a key piece to building a better downtown.

I would bet this is going very high end. With all of the amenities and with only 90-110 units this is going to be expensive housing. If they did try to make it less expensive they would cut amenities and value engineer the hell out of this-and they might value engineer the hell out of it anyways and we will get something much less bold. If you look at new proposals across the nation in a variety of cities and see the original proposal and then see what is built, this is quite common and disappointing-the redesigns, cutbacks, value engineering.

As someone mentioned somewhere, those huge cantilevered balconies will likely be cut back, and I would bet that screen for the parking will be replaced with something much more mundane-and cheaper.

I have a feeling that’s how it will be built too. Which would make this a bizarre PR move. As if millennials will feel flattered for building a technologically advanced building that almost none of them could possibly afford.

[wpcc88Participant]

You can look right down the block to see 250 High and “value engineering” at its finest. It looks nice at the street level but all together is much cheaper looking that it’s original proposal. Not a shocker as 600 Goodale and their faux stone panels fit the same bill.

Proposed:

https://d3pxppq3195xue.cloudfront.net/media/images/14/08/12/250-High—March-2014_638x484.jpg

Finished:

http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6620832/250-high-august-2015*750xx4596-2585-0-0.jpg

[Mike88Participant]

wpcc88 wrote:

You can look right down the block to see 250 High and “value engineering” at its finest. It looks nice at the street level but all together is much cheaper looking that it’s original proposal. Not a shocker as 600 Goodale and their faux stone panels fit the same bill.

Proposed:
https://d3pxppq3195xue.cloudfront.net/media/images/14/08/12/250-High—March-2014_638x484.jpg

Finished:
http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6620832/250-high-august-2015*750xx4596-2585-0-0.jpg

Maybe I’m just not savvy enough but 250 high looks a lot like the proposed renderings to me…

[Gus WParticipant]

Mike88 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>wpcc88 wrote:</div>
You can look right down the block to see 250 High and “value engineering” at its finest. It looks nice at the street level but all together is much cheaper looking that it’s original proposal. Not a shocker as 600 Goodale and their faux stone panels fit the same bill.

Proposed:<br>
https://d3pxppq3195xue.cloudfront.net/media/images/14/08/12/250-High—March-2014_638x484.jpg

Finished:<br>
http://media.bizj.us/view/img/6620832/250-high-august-2015*750xx4596-2585-0-0.jpg

Maybe I’m just not savvy enough but 250 high looks a lot like the proposed renderings to me…

Haha, I was thinking the same thing.

[MichaelCParticipant]

Of all the buildings that have changed dramatically–at least, superficially–that ain’t the one to highlight.

Perhaps you’re right that it was built with cheaper materials, but I’m not sure that’s something an untrained eye–i.e., the vast majority of folks–could notice.

[Author]

Posts