November 20, 2025 • 18 mins
Is a new arena finally coming to the Queen City? The city just bought land in the West End and Councilmember Seth Walsh says the city should go ahead with plans without the county. He discusses this with Scott.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You want to be an American back half the week,
got a love it Sloanely seven hundred WLW and a
big sports weekend head more on that a little bit
later and news involving Joe Burrow will have that covered
for you this morning.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Could be maybe possibly will we see him in action
against the Patriots of New England on Sunday. So you're
saying there's a chance before that. The city wants to
move forward on a plan to finish the banks, but
the county says we're broke, it's not a priority, and
we've got more disagreement between the county and the city.
The plan calls for up to eight hundred million dollars
(00:33):
in redevelopment over the next fifteen years to complete the
five remaining lots at the now twenty year old banks.
And we have a new twist Council unanimously approving four
million to buy the former free store food bank location
on Central Parkway that's next to TQL that's causing speculation
as a possible site for a new arena. All this
and more. He is the development guy on City Council.
(00:55):
That would be council Member Seth Walsh on the Scotslane show.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Soeth, good morning.
Speaker 4 (01:00):
How are you moring, Scott see how Man?
Speaker 3 (01:03):
Yeah, doing well.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Lots to unpack here, and this is so in your wheelhouse, obviously,
let's start with this new information about buying the four
million dollars a lot. I'm looking at the aerial on
Google Earth of this thing. I'm looking at it, going okay, well, uh,
it's next to public television, public radio. Across the street
is Queen City Radio, so it's in the shadows of
(01:24):
TQL Stadium. But I'm trying to see how you fit
an arena in there? Can you do it? If CET
goes away? Although I know they just spent a ton
of money on their their remodel. The other side of
this is a Duke Energy substation that's not movable. You've
got houses behind it. The neighbors don't want this going
across Central Avenue and keep it on Central Parkway. Is
(01:45):
this the site for a future arena?
Speaker 4 (01:49):
I mean it could be very well, could be.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Yeah, it's one of the sites, and you know, Scott
to take a look at it. You know, it's identified
in the arena study that was done last year in
twenty twenty four as one of the four cential sites
for where we could be putting an arena, including the
existing location. And that's why this acquisition is so important,
even if it ultimately doesn't become an arena. Let's get
(02:11):
control of the land so we can have that conversation
and we can drive this conversation and make sure that
we are evaluating all the options and we don't ultimately
get strung out with somebody having control of a valuable
parcel that we want if we want to put an
area there.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
So yeah, it absolutely could be an.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Arena possibility there.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
So moving some stuff right of course, you know, we
know what's going on with the public public media. CET
owns the building in the air rights, the city owns
the land itself. Cost about fifty million dollars to move
this thing, and you know you got to come up
with fifty million.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
Dollars to do that.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
If that's a possibility, then certainly you could put that
right next to TQL Sadam and almost like what you know,
putting the arena next to pay Corp, which I think
would be great, But we're not going to do that obviously.
Because now you can share facilities, you can share infrastructure
that that's good, But doesn't that then take away what
we're talking about from the Banks, Because I'm sure that
(03:02):
the entities at the Banks, and now you're negotiating with
the county on this, want to keep the arena in
its present location. A new arena if they're to build it,
why spend all the money in the Banks. If you're
going to build an arena in the West.
Speaker 5 (03:12):
End, well, the Banks, regardless of whether there's an arena
there or not. They already have two stadiums, so it's
not like we would be taking all the supporting opportunities
away from there if it did move, which again is
not even close to being decided. And I think there's
a very real conversation you have about the arena staying
at the Banks, and there's some interesting r renderings put
out about that recently.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
But if it.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
Moved off the Banks, I think that's part of the
larger conversation we need to have about the Banks.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
This is the front bord to our city and it's.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
The last great frontier of how we can really rebuild
the downtown right on the river, how people are coming
into the city of Cincinnati, and the opportunities there. I
think we need to be envisioning in a way that
is more than just expecting sports teams spill to keep
it alive and active.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Frankly, which is what gets me excited about the plan.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Is this also maybe leverage because you know, the county
stand we're broke, it's not a priority. The ferris wheel
will screw up the Freedom Center on all these other things,
and you guys so far to the man and women
on city Council. You want to move forward like yesterday
on this bank thing, and the County's not going to
go anywhere. You need both entities to go. Is this possible?
This four million dollar land by at the free Store
in Central Avens that a way for you to go.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Hey, listen, we've got some leverage here.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
I don't see this as a leverage play.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
I see this as having a vision for what we
want Cincinnati to become and I think for the future
of Cincinnati for the next ten to fifteen years. To
really put us on the national stage, we need to
have an arena and we need to have a thriving banks.
Speaker 4 (04:40):
I don't think it's an.
Speaker 5 (04:41):
Either or, and I think either location, any of the
locations for the arena helped solve that problem. But we
can't just build an arena and not be solving the
banks situation. Yeah, and likewise, we can't solve the bank
situation and not hav an arena for the city. So
my opinion on this is this is called vision and
this is called leadership, and it's not trying to leverage
(05:02):
or play anybody off each other. It's trying to move
our city and our region forward. And I'm really excited
about that because that's what we need. We need that
type energy right now.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Seth.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
You can't control what you take your contemporaries over at
the county are doing by they stretch of the imagination.
You don't control them. But can you do an arena?
Can the City of Cincinnati do an arena without county involvement?
Speaker 5 (05:26):
You know a lot of people say no. My answer
would be, you know, Scott, you and I have talked
of development a lot. Every development project you begin on
is hard and it's complicated, and it takes a lot
of creativity to figure out how you get there. It's
a lot easier for the counties at the table, But
if it's not at the table, then that means we
have to get more creative on how we solve the problem.
And I think it's something we have to commit to
(05:48):
as a city in the region and then figure out
the answers to it regardless. Look at what we did
with the convention center. Three hundred million dollars. That wasn't
found overnight, and it wasn't found from one source, And
that's what I think is going to take to do
the arena. I would like the county to come to
the table. I would like the county to be part
of this conversation. I would like them to be driving
the conversation. But I also think that the city should
(06:08):
be prepared to figure out ways to fund it even
if the county doesn't come there.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
What does that look like relative to financing? Is there
significant private money involved? As there worth a TQL that
you can be confident in saying we got enough private
money to pull that on.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
Well, you're asking a question much further down the line
than is the reality right now. Again, we're at the
very beginning stages of the arena conversation. But in the Arena.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
Study it does specifically.
Speaker 5 (06:35):
Call out that modern day arenas are being built with
about one third of it coming from private money. Yes,
I mean that is in the tunes of hundreds of
millions of dollars. So no, this would not be a
pure public funded project, and it would be a project
that would require private epsteins to get involved. It require
figuring out how we keep it occupied throughout the entire year,
so it's not just sitting there vacant. There's some really
(06:56):
good questions to it, but again it's something we have
to commit to. Once you commit to it, it's like
anything in development. You say we're going to do it,
and you figure out how you're going to do it
from there, what.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
Is the timeline in your mind?
Speaker 4 (07:07):
So it's up to me.
Speaker 5 (07:08):
As Jerry said, it would have been two weeks ago,
you know, we had been doing this. I think I
think this needs to be the priority of the next
term for city Council, for the mayor. So I think
by twenty twenty nine we need to have answers and
I'd love to see shovels in the ground by then.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
All Right, I'm talking to council Member Seth Walsh of
Cincinnati City Council on the show. With the news that
the city's purchased land at near TQL Stadium, speculation is
that maybe in arena could go there, Seth Walsh not
rulling that out. Money is the question because typically as
a county and city enterprise. But we can move forward
without the county involvement here, which is interesting because Commissioner
(07:44):
Alsha Reese said on the show, you know, we're kind
of broke right now, We're gonna have the money, worried
about tax payers and property taxes going up on all
this other stuff, and other members said it's not even
on our radar right now. Denise Dreehouse, the President said no,
probably not. And that's just the best banks let alone arena.
The banks have come before in arena if they have money.
Do the banks they certainly don't have money to do
(08:05):
an arena. Let's focus on the banks thing. How do
you move this forward if they're reluctant or just say
simply we don't have the cash.
Speaker 5 (08:14):
That's a million dollar question, isn't it. The banks has
never been done exclusively by the county. It has always
been done through a partnership. I think the conversation that
needs to be had and is happening now. There's a
steering committee that brought this plan together. If there's a
steering committee that suggests these ideas. It is a lot
of stakeholders, ranging from members of the Bangles and the
(08:35):
Reds to those who are on the banks. Already two
members of the city in the county, so it's not
like that this is not a conversation actively happening between
the city and the county. What we have to do
is keep pushing and from a city perspective, continue to
provide support. You challenge the leaders who are in the room,
who are doing the planning and making these things reality,
(08:55):
to go out and find us these projects and these
developments and then come back to us and tell us
what it takes to get the to happen. The resources
exist for development, we see it all the time. You
don't have to talk about a number of times right
to do that, we need the projects being brought to us.
And so there are people including Phil Becker, came presented
about this who this is their job to go make
(09:15):
the plan of reality now and that's how this happens.
And when they come to us and they say, hey,
we've got a building, this is what it takes, then
we start answering the question how we get there, whether
that's through subsidies, whether that's through cras, whether that's through whatever,
we start answering at that stage, says Walsh.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Denise Treehouse, the commissioned president, said this thing would be
twenty four up to twenty four stories, and she was
reluctant to agree with that because she worries about blocking daylight.
This sounds like I don't know Hyde Park on the River,
doesn't it.
Speaker 5 (09:49):
And that's my comment that I made during council. Obviously
we had different meetings to discuss the same topic. But
downtown is designed to be built big. It is designed
for these towns ours. It is you know when you
walk around the banks, as walk around it this morning,
you know, these eleven twelve story buildings feel small because
they're dwarfed by the towers that we already have downtown,
(10:09):
and so I don't agree with that assessment. I think
that the reality is we need to build height and
we you know, the bigger we build it, the more
people are going to live there, the more bustling it's
going to be, the more successful our downtown is going
to be. And I think that we need to keep
that perspective of what is built already feels small and
it's not.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
If you took what was built there.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
You drop it in say Hi Park, as you were
just alluded to, it'd be you know, twice the three
times as tall as what we're talking about building in
High Park already.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
So it's not small, but it feels small. We need
to do better on the banks. We need to do better.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Okay, the specific plans for this thing, it's going to
be up to a twelve hundred new housing units, obviously
high rise and condos and stuff like that. There's gonna
be hotel there, plus retail and entertainment as we mentioned,
up to twenty four stories tall. The new lease with
the Bengals allows for the taller buildings. Couldn't do that
before because they had rights to the airspace or so
ungodly reason. But you're talking about over these five lots
(11:03):
doing a lot of different things in that regard. People
are hearing this and go away in a minute now.
Unlike what you were talking about with maybe new arena
in the West End. This is taxpayer money. And how
would taxpayers feel about subsidizing luxury housing?
Speaker 4 (11:17):
Is it?
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Will they be pushed back in the city on that?
Speaker 4 (11:21):
There certainly could be.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
And again you're we're going down a pathway of assuming
what is going to be there. What needs to be
there is housing, and what that type of housing looks
like is a question the developer needs to tell us.
I'm a big proponent of just adding density to it
and what that looks like. Let's figure it out, you
know as well as I do. The more density you have,
the less usually end up meeting per minute because it
(11:43):
can support it. That's why one of the big questions
I asked was, let's not captus the twenty four stories.
We keep saying up to twenty four stories. It may
need to be bigger than that. And I think we
should be okay with that, and I think we should
be open to that conversation because we want these projects
to work, and if money is tight and being we
want to be protective of the public money. We make
sure that these can cash flow and make it make
(12:04):
sense and the developer wants to take it on. I mean,
ultimately that's the goal here. And if we make it
difficult for the development to happen, then yeah, we're gonna
have to come up with a lot of subsidies and
so there's a balancing act here.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah. I think it's really cool, is my daughter. Last
month was in Minneapolis visiting a friend in her place.
Is like looking literally looking over the stadium and the ballpark,
and I was like, man, that's really really cool to
be able to look down and you know, and a
lot of people, a lot of young people especially love that.
And that's kind of what you're proposing here. I know
a lot of cities, major League cities have that, and
(12:36):
I tend to agree with disass Stars watched on that
as like it's twenty four to two short, it may
and not be tall enough in that regard.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
Yeah, I mean, when I walked around downtown, one of
the things I think about it.
Speaker 4 (12:48):
Maybe it's just because you know, this is what I
think about. I guess it's like, man, it would be
so cool to them there.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
When we were designing the downtown, when we were building
the towers for the first time, and we were creating
the skyline. That's the opportunity that's in front of us.
And we're talking about five plots of big acreage writing
the heart of downtown literally two blocks south of you.
Speaker 4 (13:09):
Know, the core of downtown. We can do that.
Speaker 5 (13:11):
We can build the next one hundred hundred and fifty
years of what Cincinnati is going to look like and
feel like and what young people are going.
Speaker 4 (13:17):
To want to be part of. You're right overlooking these stadiums.
You're you know, going out on Tuesday.
Speaker 5 (13:21):
Night because they're living right there, like really making it
something cool that people are traveling around the country to see.
That's an amazing opportunity. Like what's not recited that it's
not just five parcels. It's like a huge opportunity for
the next hundred years of Cincinnati.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Okay, A legitimate question here about the timeline is the
banks is already twenty years old. The stadiums are over
twenty years old. At this point, we know everything has
a certain longevity unless you're talking maybe I don't know,
the Horseshoe, Fenway Park, Wrigley Field. These are not those
kind of facilities Great American and pay Corps, respectively. So
we're already twenty years into this thing. Another fifteen years
(13:56):
makes it thirty five. At some point, are we building
something for the future when the future with those stadiums
may have to change.
Speaker 4 (14:05):
Well, And that's that's the point that I made earlier.
Speaker 5 (14:07):
You know, what we need to be designing the banks
for as longevity and It needs to not be just
exclusively is there an arena, Are there stadiums there? What's
the sport team doing for this day? It needs to
be designed around a place that people are going to
want to live and stay and be part of. You
think about four Street or we're seeing a lot of
development and activity happening, people moving to it. You know,
they're there because the buildings are beautiful. They're there because
(14:31):
they're walkable to everything that you want to do in
the downtown area. And that's always going to be the
case with downtown. That's the same question we have to
be answering with the Banks. It's not just about pay
Court Stadium. It is about the future of who's going
to stay and want to live there. Again, that's a
really cool, exciting opportunity for me.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
It is at the same time, you know, in circling
back to the question about the arena, with the purchase
of the property Seth Walsh at near TQL Stadium, then
a new arena could go there and you could do
it without county participation, which I think is causing a
lot of people to maybe give the radio their speaker's
side eye this morning, their heads on the little side
eye right now and go, WHOA, that was a bomb.
How much weight do the Reds, the Bengals and the
(15:08):
Banks Working Group have in this whole equation? Now we
know that the contract was needed negotiated to allow twenty
four stories or more to go up because the Bengals
would control that. But there's a lot of stuff these lots,
it looks like, you know, talgating lots and things like
that that the Bengals have a say in. The Reds
obviously carry a lot of weight in this equation too,
as well as those who invested with the Bank's Working
Group and what's already down there regarding that, whether it's
(15:31):
expansion of what we're talking about here or the arena,
how much do they have a saying where or else
it's going to go and how it's gonna work out.
Speaker 5 (15:40):
I mean, when you say how much do they have
to say? Are you talking about the arena? Are you
talking about.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
Well, well, development of the banks, but also let's factor
the arena. Let's start with that seth. I mean, can
they just say, hey, we're you're not gonna put this
in the West End, You're gonna put it at the
Banks and you're gonna we're going to tear down the
tired Heritage Bank Center and maybe it's two years, but
we're going to put a new one here. And that's
what we've decided because we're the power brokers. I think
a lot of people think that's the case inside the
(16:05):
inside city Hall.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
Is that true?
Speaker 5 (16:08):
Well, when you talk about the arena, and as we
talked about the arena study earlier, you know a third
of that, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars that's
probably gonna have to come from private entities to make
that a reality.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
And that's gonna be a big part of the conversation.
If if the.
Speaker 5 (16:21):
Private money that's coming to the table says we're not
building it at this location, X, Y, and Z wherever
that is, guess what, It's not gonna be built there
because you're not gonna get private money.
Speaker 4 (16:30):
If if they're saying that's not where it can go.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
So if the power brokers quote unquote whoever that is
in this conversation.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
H the illuminati said that's the Illuminati. We'll call it
what it is.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Whatever we want to call it.
Speaker 5 (16:42):
If they want to go a certain location, they're gonna
have to come to the table too. I mean that's
the thing for the arena, for the banks were we're
not adversaries here. We all trying to run the same direction.
And if you have a vision where you want to go,
you're gonna have to step up to the table with
the money and the resources and help make that happen.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
None of these are gonna be cheap, but you.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Know, the future in the vision of Cincinnati is going
to come at a cost. And I think that's a
good investment for us because this is something we're going
to be talking about, you know, for an arena. We've
been talking about arena for fifty years from the banks.
Hopefully that's the next one hundred years of success. People
are proud that we did not saying, man, these guys
really messed up.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Yeah, yeah, all right, And then I think the same
is probably true when it comes to the redevelopment down
there as well. They have a say, but they don't
get veto power correct.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
Yeah, that's exactly it.
Speaker 5 (17:26):
You know, we're all a team, but ultimately we got
to be looking long term about what's being what's happening here.
They have a seat at the table. They've been very
involved in that. MI understandings they're very supportive of what
the plan is. That's that's exactly what this needs to be.
All right, team, let's make it happen together.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
Got it?
Speaker 2 (17:41):
Council Member Seth Wall, It's always a pleasure, love the Insight.
Thanks again for coming on the show and Ed and
I'm sure we will want to talk. But have a
wonderful thanksgiving you two. Scott, all right, take care, appreciate
your time as always. Let me get a time out
in some reaction maybe here too as well. And that
sounds like a you know what, a big middle finger
to the county Commission.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Don't you like you know what? You guys won't move up.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
We got this, we got this interesting more to follow, Sloany,
Here's new seven hundred W Dowd, Cincinnati,
You want to be an American back half the week,
got a love it Sloanely seven hundred WLW and a
big sports weekend head more on that a little bit
later and news involving Joe Burrow will have that covered
for you this morning.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Could be maybe possibly will we see him in action
against the Patriots of New England on Sunday. So you're
saying there's a chance before that. The city wants to
move forward on a plan to finish the banks, but
the county says we're broke, it's not a priority, and
we've got more disagreement between the county and the city.
The plan calls for up to eight hundred million dollars
(00:33):
in redevelopment over the next fifteen years to complete the
five remaining lots at the now twenty year old banks.
And we have a new twist Council unanimously approving four
million to buy the former free store food bank location
on Central Parkway that's next to TQL that's causing speculation
as a possible site for a new arena. All this
and more. He is the development guy on City Council.
(00:55):
That would be council Member Seth Walsh on the Scotslane show.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Soeth, good morning.
Speaker 4 (01:00):
How are you moring, Scott see how Man?
Speaker 3 (01:03):
Yeah, doing well.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Lots to unpack here, and this is so in your wheelhouse, obviously,
let's start with this new information about buying the four
million dollars a lot. I'm looking at the aerial on
Google Earth of this thing. I'm looking at it, going okay, well, uh,
it's next to public television, public radio. Across the street
is Queen City Radio, so it's in the shadows of
(01:24):
TQL Stadium. But I'm trying to see how you fit
an arena in there? Can you do it? If CET
goes away? Although I know they just spent a ton
of money on their their remodel. The other side of
this is a Duke Energy substation that's not movable. You've
got houses behind it. The neighbors don't want this going
across Central Avenue and keep it on Central Parkway. Is
(01:45):
this the site for a future arena?
Speaker 4 (01:49):
I mean it could be very well, could be.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Yeah, it's one of the sites, and you know, Scott
to take a look at it. You know, it's identified
in the arena study that was done last year in
twenty twenty four as one of the four cential sites
for where we could be putting an arena, including the
existing location. And that's why this acquisition is so important,
even if it ultimately doesn't become an arena. Let's get
(02:11):
control of the land so we can have that conversation
and we can drive this conversation and make sure that
we are evaluating all the options and we don't ultimately
get strung out with somebody having control of a valuable
parcel that we want if we want to put an
area there.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
So yeah, it absolutely could be an.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Arena possibility there.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
So moving some stuff right of course, you know, we
know what's going on with the public public media. CET
owns the building in the air rights, the city owns
the land itself. Cost about fifty million dollars to move
this thing, and you know you got to come up
with fifty million.
Speaker 3 (02:39):
Dollars to do that.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
If that's a possibility, then certainly you could put that
right next to TQL Sadam and almost like what you know,
putting the arena next to pay Corp, which I think
would be great, But we're not going to do that obviously.
Because now you can share facilities, you can share infrastructure
that that's good, But doesn't that then take away what
we're talking about from the Banks, Because I'm sure that
(03:02):
the entities at the Banks, and now you're negotiating with
the county on this, want to keep the arena in
its present location. A new arena if they're to build it,
why spend all the money in the Banks. If you're
going to build an arena in the West.
Speaker 5 (03:12):
End, well, the Banks, regardless of whether there's an arena
there or not. They already have two stadiums, so it's
not like we would be taking all the supporting opportunities
away from there if it did move, which again is
not even close to being decided. And I think there's
a very real conversation you have about the arena staying
at the Banks, and there's some interesting r renderings put
out about that recently.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
But if it.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
Moved off the Banks, I think that's part of the
larger conversation we need to have about the Banks.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
This is the front bord to our city and it's.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
The last great frontier of how we can really rebuild
the downtown right on the river, how people are coming
into the city of Cincinnati, and the opportunities there. I
think we need to be envisioning in a way that
is more than just expecting sports teams spill to keep
it alive and active.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Frankly, which is what gets me excited about the plan.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Is this also maybe leverage because you know, the county
stand we're broke, it's not a priority. The ferris wheel
will screw up the Freedom Center on all these other things,
and you guys so far to the man and women
on city Council. You want to move forward like yesterday
on this bank thing, and the County's not going to
go anywhere. You need both entities to go. Is this possible?
This four million dollar land by at the free Store
in Central Avens that a way for you to go.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Hey, listen, we've got some leverage here.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
I don't see this as a leverage play.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
I see this as having a vision for what we
want Cincinnati to become and I think for the future
of Cincinnati for the next ten to fifteen years. To
really put us on the national stage, we need to
have an arena and we need to have a thriving banks.
Speaker 4 (04:40):
I don't think it's an.
Speaker 5 (04:41):
Either or, and I think either location, any of the
locations for the arena helped solve that problem. But we
can't just build an arena and not be solving the
banks situation. Yeah, and likewise, we can't solve the bank
situation and not hav an arena for the city. So
my opinion on this is this is called vision and
this is called leadership, and it's not trying to leverage
(05:02):
or play anybody off each other. It's trying to move
our city and our region forward. And I'm really excited
about that because that's what we need. We need that
type energy right now.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
Seth.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
You can't control what you take your contemporaries over at
the county are doing by they stretch of the imagination.
You don't control them. But can you do an arena?
Can the City of Cincinnati do an arena without county involvement?
Speaker 5 (05:26):
You know a lot of people say no. My answer
would be, you know, Scott, you and I have talked
of development a lot. Every development project you begin on
is hard and it's complicated, and it takes a lot
of creativity to figure out how you get there. It's
a lot easier for the counties at the table, But
if it's not at the table, then that means we
have to get more creative on how we solve the problem.
And I think it's something we have to commit to
(05:48):
as a city in the region and then figure out
the answers to it regardless. Look at what we did
with the convention center. Three hundred million dollars. That wasn't
found overnight, and it wasn't found from one source, And
that's what I think is going to take to do
the arena. I would like the county to come to
the table. I would like the county to be part
of this conversation. I would like them to be driving
the conversation. But I also think that the city should
(06:08):
be prepared to figure out ways to fund it even
if the county doesn't come there.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
What does that look like relative to financing? Is there
significant private money involved? As there worth a TQL that
you can be confident in saying we got enough private
money to pull that on.
Speaker 5 (06:24):
Well, you're asking a question much further down the line
than is the reality right now. Again, we're at the
very beginning stages of the arena conversation. But in the Arena.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
Study it does specifically.
Speaker 5 (06:35):
Call out that modern day arenas are being built with
about one third of it coming from private money. Yes,
I mean that is in the tunes of hundreds of
millions of dollars. So no, this would not be a
pure public funded project, and it would be a project
that would require private epsteins to get involved. It require
figuring out how we keep it occupied throughout the entire year,
so it's not just sitting there vacant. There's some really
(06:56):
good questions to it, but again it's something we have
to commit to. Once you commit to it, it's like
anything in development. You say we're going to do it,
and you figure out how you're going to do it
from there, what.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
Is the timeline in your mind?
Speaker 4 (07:07):
So it's up to me.
Speaker 5 (07:08):
As Jerry said, it would have been two weeks ago,
you know, we had been doing this. I think I
think this needs to be the priority of the next
term for city Council, for the mayor. So I think
by twenty twenty nine we need to have answers and
I'd love to see shovels in the ground by then.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
All Right, I'm talking to council Member Seth Walsh of
Cincinnati City Council on the show. With the news that
the city's purchased land at near TQL Stadium, speculation is
that maybe in arena could go there, Seth Walsh not
rulling that out. Money is the question because typically as
a county and city enterprise. But we can move forward
without the county involvement here, which is interesting because Commissioner
(07:44):
Alsha Reese said on the show, you know, we're kind
of broke right now, We're gonna have the money, worried
about tax payers and property taxes going up on all
this other stuff, and other members said it's not even
on our radar right now. Denise Dreehouse, the President said no,
probably not. And that's just the best banks let alone arena.
The banks have come before in arena if they have money.
Do the banks they certainly don't have money to do
(08:05):
an arena. Let's focus on the banks thing. How do
you move this forward if they're reluctant or just say
simply we don't have the cash.
Speaker 5 (08:14):
That's a million dollar question, isn't it. The banks has
never been done exclusively by the county. It has always
been done through a partnership. I think the conversation that
needs to be had and is happening now. There's a
steering committee that brought this plan together. If there's a
steering committee that suggests these ideas. It is a lot
of stakeholders, ranging from members of the Bangles and the
(08:35):
Reds to those who are on the banks. Already two
members of the city in the county, so it's not
like that this is not a conversation actively happening between
the city and the county. What we have to do
is keep pushing and from a city perspective, continue to
provide support. You challenge the leaders who are in the room,
who are doing the planning and making these things reality,
(08:55):
to go out and find us these projects and these
developments and then come back to us and tell us
what it takes to get the to happen. The resources
exist for development, we see it all the time. You
don't have to talk about a number of times right
to do that, we need the projects being brought to us.
And so there are people including Phil Becker, came presented
about this who this is their job to go make
(09:15):
the plan of reality now and that's how this happens.
And when they come to us and they say, hey,
we've got a building, this is what it takes, then
we start answering the question how we get there, whether
that's through subsidies, whether that's through cras, whether that's through whatever,
we start answering at that stage, says Walsh.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Denise Treehouse, the commissioned president, said this thing would be
twenty four up to twenty four stories, and she was
reluctant to agree with that because she worries about blocking daylight.
This sounds like I don't know Hyde Park on the River,
doesn't it.
Speaker 5 (09:49):
And that's my comment that I made during council. Obviously
we had different meetings to discuss the same topic. But
downtown is designed to be built big. It is designed
for these towns ours. It is you know when you
walk around the banks, as walk around it this morning,
you know, these eleven twelve story buildings feel small because
they're dwarfed by the towers that we already have downtown,
(10:09):
and so I don't agree with that assessment. I think
that the reality is we need to build height and
we you know, the bigger we build it, the more
people are going to live there, the more bustling it's
going to be, the more successful our downtown is going
to be. And I think that we need to keep
that perspective of what is built already feels small and
it's not.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
If you took what was built there.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
You drop it in say Hi Park, as you were
just alluded to, it'd be you know, twice the three
times as tall as what we're talking about building in
High Park already.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
So it's not small, but it feels small. We need
to do better on the banks. We need to do better.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
Okay, the specific plans for this thing, it's going to
be up to a twelve hundred new housing units, obviously
high rise and condos and stuff like that. There's gonna
be hotel there, plus retail and entertainment as we mentioned,
up to twenty four stories tall. The new lease with
the Bengals allows for the taller buildings. Couldn't do that
before because they had rights to the airspace or so
ungodly reason. But you're talking about over these five lots
(11:03):
doing a lot of different things in that regard. People
are hearing this and go away in a minute now.
Unlike what you were talking about with maybe new arena
in the West End. This is taxpayer money. And how
would taxpayers feel about subsidizing luxury housing?
Speaker 4 (11:17):
Is it?
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Will they be pushed back in the city on that?
Speaker 4 (11:21):
There certainly could be.
Speaker 5 (11:22):
And again you're we're going down a pathway of assuming
what is going to be there. What needs to be
there is housing, and what that type of housing looks
like is a question the developer needs to tell us.
I'm a big proponent of just adding density to it
and what that looks like. Let's figure it out, you
know as well as I do. The more density you have,
the less usually end up meeting per minute because it
(11:43):
can support it. That's why one of the big questions
I asked was, let's not captus the twenty four stories.
We keep saying up to twenty four stories. It may
need to be bigger than that. And I think we
should be okay with that, and I think we should
be open to that conversation because we want these projects
to work, and if money is tight and being we
want to be protective of the public money. We make
sure that these can cash flow and make it make
(12:04):
sense and the developer wants to take it on. I mean,
ultimately that's the goal here. And if we make it
difficult for the development to happen, then yeah, we're gonna
have to come up with a lot of subsidies and
so there's a balancing act here.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah. I think it's really cool, is my daughter. Last
month was in Minneapolis visiting a friend in her place.
Is like looking literally looking over the stadium and the ballpark,
and I was like, man, that's really really cool to
be able to look down and you know, and a
lot of people, a lot of young people especially love that.
And that's kind of what you're proposing here. I know
a lot of cities, major League cities have that, and
(12:36):
I tend to agree with disass Stars watched on that
as like it's twenty four to two short, it may
and not be tall enough in that regard.
Speaker 5 (12:44):
Yeah, I mean, when I walked around downtown, one of
the things I think about it.
Speaker 4 (12:48):
Maybe it's just because you know, this is what I
think about. I guess it's like, man, it would be
so cool to them there.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
When we were designing the downtown, when we were building
the towers for the first time, and we were creating
the skyline. That's the opportunity that's in front of us.
And we're talking about five plots of big acreage writing
the heart of downtown literally two blocks south of you.
Speaker 4 (13:09):
Know, the core of downtown. We can do that.
Speaker 5 (13:11):
We can build the next one hundred hundred and fifty
years of what Cincinnati is going to look like and
feel like and what young people are going.
Speaker 4 (13:17):
To want to be part of. You're right overlooking these stadiums.
You're you know, going out on Tuesday.
Speaker 5 (13:21):
Night because they're living right there, like really making it
something cool that people are traveling around the country to see.
That's an amazing opportunity. Like what's not recited that it's
not just five parcels. It's like a huge opportunity for
the next hundred years of Cincinnati.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Okay, A legitimate question here about the timeline is the
banks is already twenty years old. The stadiums are over
twenty years old. At this point, we know everything has
a certain longevity unless you're talking maybe I don't know,
the Horseshoe, Fenway Park, Wrigley Field. These are not those
kind of facilities Great American and pay Corps, respectively. So
we're already twenty years into this thing. Another fifteen years
(13:56):
makes it thirty five. At some point, are we building
something for the future when the future with those stadiums
may have to change.
Speaker 4 (14:05):
Well, And that's that's the point that I made earlier.
Speaker 5 (14:07):
You know, what we need to be designing the banks
for as longevity and It needs to not be just
exclusively is there an arena, Are there stadiums there? What's
the sport team doing for this day? It needs to
be designed around a place that people are going to
want to live and stay and be part of. You
think about four Street or we're seeing a lot of
development and activity happening, people moving to it. You know,
they're there because the buildings are beautiful. They're there because
(14:31):
they're walkable to everything that you want to do in
the downtown area. And that's always going to be the
case with downtown. That's the same question we have to
be answering with the Banks. It's not just about pay
Court Stadium. It is about the future of who's going
to stay and want to live there. Again, that's a
really cool, exciting opportunity for me.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
It is at the same time, you know, in circling
back to the question about the arena, with the purchase
of the property Seth Walsh at near TQL Stadium, then
a new arena could go there and you could do
it without county participation, which I think is causing a
lot of people to maybe give the radio their speaker's
side eye this morning, their heads on the little side
eye right now and go, WHOA, that was a bomb.
How much weight do the Reds, the Bengals and the
(15:08):
Banks Working Group have in this whole equation? Now we
know that the contract was needed negotiated to allow twenty
four stories or more to go up because the Bengals
would control that. But there's a lot of stuff these lots,
it looks like, you know, talgating lots and things like
that that the Bengals have a say in. The Reds
obviously carry a lot of weight in this equation too,
as well as those who invested with the Bank's Working
Group and what's already down there regarding that, whether it's
(15:31):
expansion of what we're talking about here or the arena,
how much do they have a saying where or else
it's going to go and how it's gonna work out.
Speaker 5 (15:40):
I mean, when you say how much do they have
to say? Are you talking about the arena? Are you
talking about.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
Well, well, development of the banks, but also let's factor
the arena. Let's start with that seth. I mean, can
they just say, hey, we're you're not gonna put this
in the West End, You're gonna put it at the
Banks and you're gonna we're going to tear down the
tired Heritage Bank Center and maybe it's two years, but
we're going to put a new one here. And that's
what we've decided because we're the power brokers. I think
a lot of people think that's the case inside the
(16:05):
inside city Hall.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
Is that true?
Speaker 5 (16:08):
Well, when you talk about the arena, and as we
talked about the arena study earlier, you know a third
of that, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars that's
probably gonna have to come from private entities to make
that a reality.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
And that's gonna be a big part of the conversation.
If if the.
Speaker 5 (16:21):
Private money that's coming to the table says we're not
building it at this location, X, Y, and Z wherever
that is, guess what, It's not gonna be built there
because you're not gonna get private money.
Speaker 4 (16:30):
If if they're saying that's not where it can go.
Speaker 5 (16:32):
So if the power brokers quote unquote whoever that is
in this conversation.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
H the illuminati said that's the Illuminati. We'll call it
what it is.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Whatever we want to call it.
Speaker 5 (16:42):
If they want to go a certain location, they're gonna
have to come to the table too. I mean that's
the thing for the arena, for the banks were we're
not adversaries here. We all trying to run the same direction.
And if you have a vision where you want to go,
you're gonna have to step up to the table with
the money and the resources and help make that happen.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
None of these are gonna be cheap, but you.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Know, the future in the vision of Cincinnati is going
to come at a cost. And I think that's a
good investment for us because this is something we're going
to be talking about, you know, for an arena. We've
been talking about arena for fifty years from the banks.
Hopefully that's the next one hundred years of success. People
are proud that we did not saying, man, these guys
really messed up.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Yeah, yeah, all right, And then I think the same
is probably true when it comes to the redevelopment down
there as well. They have a say, but they don't
get veto power correct.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
Yeah, that's exactly it.
Speaker 5 (17:26):
You know, we're all a team, but ultimately we got
to be looking long term about what's being what's happening here.
They have a seat at the table. They've been very
involved in that. MI understandings they're very supportive of what
the plan is. That's that's exactly what this needs to be.
All right, team, let's make it happen together.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
Got it?
Speaker 2 (17:41):
Council Member Seth Wall, It's always a pleasure, love the Insight.
Thanks again for coming on the show and Ed and
I'm sure we will want to talk. But have a
wonderful thanksgiving you two. Scott, all right, take care, appreciate
your time as always. Let me get a time out
in some reaction maybe here too as well. And that
sounds like a you know what, a big middle finger
to the county Commission.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Don't you like you know what? You guys won't move up.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
We got this, we got this interesting more to follow, Sloany,
Here's new seven hundred W Dowd, Cincinnati,
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.